A World Cup without drones: the US plan to shield its skies for security (and how necessary it is)

If in June of last year the president issued an executive order to reduce “the growing threat” of drones against the country’s security, in December his government stated that all unmanned aerial vehicles manufactured abroad represented “unacceptable risks” and were prohibited from selling their products freely in the country. The biggest blow was to DJI, the leading Chinese company in the sector.

That is why it is not surprising that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) reported this week that the government will invest US$115 million in anti-drone technology to increase the security of the skies during the great soccer tournament. A measure that will be accompanied by a new office dedicated to promoting drone and anti-drone technologies.

Weeks ago, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), which is part of DHS, granted US$250 million to the 11 states in the country that will host World Cup matches in order to acquire anti-drone technology. During the event, the use of these vehicles will be restricted at the event venues.

Relevant investment

Although drones could pose a risk, it is clear that an event like the World Cup, with so many venues and outdoor spaces, represents a security challenge for any nation.

For this reason, international security expert Román Ortiz considers that an investment in anti-drone technology is essential. “Drones mean a leap in the capabilities that any criminal or terrorist group has. It makes a lot of sense to seek protection from them in an event of that magnitude. It must be taken into account that drones are not only used with explosives. In Mexico they have been used to discharge aggressive chemicals on the population. It is a quite complicated situation, especially when one has crowds concentrated in places with open skies,” he tells El Comercio.

The expert highlights that in terms of security, drones are a challenge because they are new technologies that are very much aimed at domestic use and are seen in the civil space, where they have so many applications that they are very difficult to control, so anyone can transform a civil drone into a military instrument with relative ease.

Along the same lines, Juan Yamamoto, an expert in unmanned vehicles in Peru and instructor at the Elmer Faucett Higher Technological Institute, points out that it is a technology that has evolved greatly.

“If a person at home can assemble a drone for $500 and that drone can carry at least a load of 500 grams, then you have to know that a grenade weighs 340 grams. That is, it is within the range of what is considered a lethal and high-profile weapon that can be highly effective,” he explains.

Experts add that another fundamental point to keep in mind is that in the case of unmanned aircraft technologies, the attack is much cheaper than the defense. “This means that you have to make a very large investment to protect, while whoever uses the drone as an instrument of aggression gets a very effective instrument of war for a relatively small investment,” says Ortiz.

Various strategies

The White House has not detailed what technologies it will use against suspected drones, but some of the most common include tracking software or lasers to counter these unmanned vehicles.

“There are a variety of technologies to intercept drones. From disturbing signal waves, which block the signal that the operator is sending to operate a drone, to firearms that are used to physically shoot down the drones,” explains Ortiz.

There are also military drones that seek to shoot down the missiles of smaller drones, always with the aim of interrupting the flight of the drone or so that the person who is controlling it no longer has control of the device, explains Carlos Saito Villanueva, co-founder and operations manager of Grupo Qaira, a Peruvian start-up that develops drones to monitor the environment.

“Lasers are also interesting because what they do is damage the drone itself, drones are also used against drones. There are even drones that have a kind of fabric that is thrown at the suspicious drone and that makes it fall. So there are many ways to neutralize a drone. Its size and what you want to do with it is key to knowing which anti-drone technology is the best.”

Yamamoto asks not to forget that security works in layers. “The first is the legal one, where the prohibition of the use of these devices is important. The second is the technological one and the last layer is the physical one, where the installation of meshes is evaluated, for example, to protect a specific place.”

Despite the possible threats, Saito emphasizes that these devices are not weapons in themselves, so control over their use will be crucial to avoid attacks or unwanted events.

“Clearly, the State has to be protected against that and must protect its critical assets and everything where intelligence may consider that there may be an attack using drones,” he says.

Yamamoto adds that the world has too many ongoing conflicts to pass up the opportunity to test new technologies to control airspace. “Doing so will serve us all. I imagine that all nations or all security agencies will take note of the American experience in the 2025 World Cup to guarantee the security of future events of that magnitude,” he points out.