متتبع أزمة إيران-الخليج 2026
CC
Events Archive
humanitarianMay 8, 2026

The invisible battlefield: Spectrum dominance is the ultimate weapon | The Jerusalem Post

Summary

While the precise operational details regarding the recent war involving Israel, the United States, and Iran remain highly classified, one reality is undeniable: Both Israel and the US have successfully executed highly accurate operations across vast distances. Feats of this magnitude can only be accomplished by maintaining a continuous, unbroken flow of data to striking forces thousands of kilometers away. The true lethality of modern warfare does not stem simply from ingenious new tactics or novel kinetic weaponry. Rather, it lies in the seamless collection, transmission, and processing of information between thousands of combatants in real time. In ancient times, the Phalanx formation provided Alexander the Great with a revolutionary tactical advantage through the physical synchronization of men acting as a single, devastating unit. Today, the core concept remains exactly the same, but the scale has expanded exponentially. Modern military superiority relies on the absolute synchronization of air, land, sea, and special operations units. The invisible force enabling this ultimate synchronization is the Electromagnetic Spectrum (EMS). The myth of a clean spectrum The foundational rule of spectrum management used to be elementary: avoid frequency overlap at all costs. Assigning distinct systems to distinct frequencies prevented signal interference. In the modern battlespace, however, this basic principle is almost obsolete. Much like the civilian sector – where a single person might simultaneously broadcast from a phone, smartwatch, laptop, earbuds, and Bluetooth trackers – a modern combat unit is saturated with active EM emitters. This creates an incredibly dense and noisy local environment. Compounding this challenge is the military's absolute need for operational flexibility. To ensure life-saving transmissions cut through the noise, modern systems cannot rely on static channels; they must dynamically calibrate their EM emission characteristics, constantly adjusting power levels and frequencies on the fly to reach their targets. The double-edged sword of jamming The enemy, of course, relies on the spectrum too. Stripping them of this asset cripples their operational capacity, making the EM jammer one of the modern battlefield's most vital weapons. Yet jamming is inherently a double-edged sword. A powerful jammer that disrupts an adversary's communications can easily cause "electromagnetic fratricide," unintentionally blinding your own units in the process. Unlike the physical territories of land, sea, or air, the EM spectrum cannot be walled off or permanently occupied; it is a shared, borderless domain. Ultimately, the spectrum itself is just invisible infrastructure. Its true value lies in the advanced systems designed to exploit it. But technology is agnostic. Because the underlying hardware and principles are known and accessible to both sides of a conflict, the race for spectrum dominance is relentless, making the precise management of these EM resources an absolute necessity for survival. The three dimensions of spectrum control With EM resources being incredibly scarce, commanders must fit their tactical pieces together like a complex puzzle. While the spectrum is a non-physical space governed by frequencies, its actual use is heavily bound by physical constraints, such as the location of the unit and the wattage of the transmitter. Therefore, planning a military operation requires a strategy to "divide and conquer" the spectrum. The first step is frequency separation – distinguishing military equipment from common commercial bands. The 2.4 GHz frequency, for example, is the standard for Wi-Fi; it will inevitably be flooded by civilian and enemy noise, making it highly unreliable. When separate frequencies aren't available, forces use time differentiation. By synchronizing devices to transmit on the same frequency at alternating milliseconds, they can share a single EM resource without colliding. Finally, there is physical separation. This involves spacing out the hardware geographically to prevent interference, but it remains the most difficult strategy to implement, as it directly restricts the mobility and operational flexibility of the combat units. The cognitive leap: AI in the spectrum Securing a tactical victory requires absolute control and synchronization of the electromagnetic space. Yet, this invisible battlefield is crowded with civilian and military traffic alike. This congestion creates a critical blind spot: How do you identify a threat when the airwaves are already full? Today, artificial intelligence is bridging that gap. In the realm of spectrum warfare, AI algorithms are designed to constantly hunt for answers to four questions: Has a new transmission appeared? What is it? Where is it coming from? And what is its intent? Because popular frequencies are almost entirely occupied at all times, finding a hostile signal is like finding a needle in an electromagnetic haystack. A raw spike in energy means nothing on its own; it could be anything from a nearby Wi-Fi router to an enemy drone link. AI solves this by learning the "scenery." Over time, the system maps the normal, chaotic patterns of a shared civilian-military environment. It doesn't need to know exactly who is transmitting; it just learns what normal looks like. When an unknown, irregular signal breaks that pattern, the AI acts as an immediate tripwire. The challenge doesn't end at detection. In a dense EM environment, a suspicious transmission rarely arrives cleanly; it is mashed together with countless other regular signals. AI is utilized to mathematically untangle this mess, differentiating the distorted signal from the background noise to reveal its original, uncorrupted shape. Once the pure signal is isolated, the AI references its learned libraries to classify the transmission, turning raw, chaotic noise into actionable military intelligence. Engineering for a contested battlespace In the modern defense industry, designing a new platform requires evaluating its electromagnetic footprint from the ground up. Planners must actively avoid relying on highly trafficked spectral resources. Yes, it costs considerably more, in time and capital, to engineer proprietary tools that shift a device away from cheaper, readily available commercial frequencies. But that initial investment is the ultimate difference between a system functioning or failing when the battlefield becomes hopelessly saturated with noise. Ultimately, modern military designers must assume that access to the spectrum will never be guaranteed. Building layered redundancies and fallback systems is no longer an optional luxury; it is a vital prerequisite for surviving the inevitable moments when the EM spectrum is aggressively denied. Dr. Omer Kaspi is a System Engineering consultant in the defense industry. He is a lecturer and researcher at Afeka College of Engineering and head of the Product Management specialty at Shenkar College of Engineering, Design and Art

Actors involved

USIsraelIran

Sources

  • DR OMER KASPIBy DR OMER KASPI

    While the precise operational details regarding the recent war involving Israel, the United States, and Iran remain highly classified, one reality is undeniable: Both Israel and the US have successfully executed highly accurate operations across vast distances. Feats of this magn

See this event through different lenses

Compare how Western, Iranian, Israeli, Global South, and Pro-Peace perspectives frame this event.

Compare Perspectives

Community Notes

Community Notes

Loading notes...

Related events

humanitarianUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaChina
1 source

Tuesday, June 16, 2026 75° Today's Paper Today Already a Honolulu Star-Advertiser subscriber? Log in now to continue reading. From as low as $12.95 /mo. A recent comprehensive global survey study of tens of thousands of people in nearly 100 countries found the vast majority see the United States as the biggest threat to the world.

At the same time, more nations say they prefer China over the U.S. China’s approval rating has risen dramatically in the Global South, where support for the U.S. has plummeted. These were the results of the 2026 Democracy Perception Index, an annual study conducted by a group called the Alliance of Democracies.

The survey asked 23,968 respondents in 84 countries which nation they consider to be “the biggest threat to the world.” Most people in 65 out of 84 countries said the United States is the largest danger. Another 10 countries (almost all in Europe) said Russia is the biggest threat.

Seven (in West Asia and North Africa) said Israel. Israel said Iran. Japan said China. Trevor Tyler Halawa Stay in touch with breaking news, as it happens, conveniently in your email inbox. It's FREE! EXPRESS YOURSELF The Honolulu Star-Advertiser welcomes all opinions.

Want your voice to be heard? Submit a letter to the editor. >> Write us: We welcome letters up to 150 words, and guest columns of 500-600 words. We reserve the right to edit for clarity and length. Include your name, address and daytime phone number.

>> Mail: Letters to the Editor, Honolulu Star-Advertiser 7 Waterfront Plaza, 500 Ala Moana, Suite #7-500 Honolulu, HI 96813 >> Contact: 529-4831 (phone), [email protected], staradvertiser.

humanitarianUnverifiedUSIsraelIranRussiaChina
1 source

“We want them [Iran] to behave like a normal country,” said US Vice President JD Vance regarding the US-Iran memorandum of understanding (MoU) during a Monday night interview with CBS News. Vance explained that if Tehran complies with the points outlined in the MoU, including giving up its stockpile of enriched uranium, stopping funding to terrorist organizations, and making the country investible, then “benefits will float to them.

” Uranium stockpile at center of deal The most important thing to focus on, said Vance, is the enriched uranium, which, according to the MoU, would be destroyed by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and the US. “We want them to have a successful country, but only if they do what's necessary to commit long-term to not building a nuclear weapon,” said Vance.

Vance rejects Obama comparison In a video shown to Vance by the CBS interviewer, former US President Barack Obama is seen saying that any agreement that arises between the US and Iran is “not going to be significantly different, or a significant improvement from the deal that we had in the first place and that we had worked for for a long stretch of time.

” Vance responded that Obama’s claims are “fundamentally not right.” “If you go back to the Obama JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action), what it did was it took an Iranian nuclear program that it accelerated. It basically bribed the Iranians to stop that program.

The JCPOA was an Obama-led multilateral agreement between Iran and the US, UK, France, China, Russia, and Germany to limit Iran’s nuclear development. Vance argued that Trump’s administration is in a different position. “The Iranian nuclear program has been completely destroyed, and what we’re saying is: make the long-term commitment to not rebuild it, and you will get the benefits that come with that.

” Vance addresses Israeli concerns The vice president also noted that the Gulf States, whom he claims have been threatened by the Iranian regime for 47 years, “hated the JCPOA because they felt that it empowered Iran to be a bad regional actor.” The same countries, argued Vance, have called Trump’s plan “amazing because it transforms the Middle East in a way that makes them more peaceful and more prosperous.

” When asked about Israeli involvement in the MoU, Vance responded that it is normal for close allies to have disagreements. “What we know,” he said, “is that this agreement is going to make Israel safer, going to make the entire region safer. We feel quite confident that the Israelis are going to be brought in on this agreement once we get a little further down the road.

Location: Jerusalem
humanitarianUnverifiedIsraelProxy
1 source

On March 2, 2026, Hezbollah fired at Israel two days after US and Israeli strikes on Iran, initiating exchanges in which Israeli forces have targeted Hezbollah infrastructure in southern Lebanon and Hezbollah has struck northern Israel and Israeli positions in Lebanon.

Lebanon's Health Ministry has reported more than 3,213 deaths and over 1 million people displaced after nearly three months of strikes. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated that Hezbollah's use of explosive drones requires increased operations, while US and Israeli officials have described the Lebanon conflict as separate from negotiations with Iran.

Location: Tehran