Members of NATO are spending countless amounts of money trying to develop a solution to the threat of commercial drones on the battlefields. Are they wasting money?
In the past five to ten years, commercial drones have been used on every major battlefield in the world. We've seen them used effectively as reconnaissance devices by groups like the Free Syrian Army and the Islamic State, and we've seen them weaponized to drop small bomblets on direct-targets on the ground in places like Armenia and Ukraine. While we've been shouting from the rooftops about this problem since 2015, NATO is just now finally starting to realize the severity of the situation.
As a result, and not shockingly to anyone at all, they're now paying hundreds of thousands, probably even millions to defense contractors who are trying to develop an anti-drone weapon system that will help eliminate them from the battle-space. While near peer warfare is the primary target of the United States Military right now, it's very clear that commercial drones are still on everyone's mind, and they probably will be for the foreseeable future.
Funnily enough, in all the videos we've seen of drones being weaponized by insurgent factions, so far the best defense has been to literally shoot them out of the air with a rifle when they come to a stop. I'd bet, if they really wanted to combat this problem without wasting a bunch of money, they'd take a platoon of U.S. Marines and a platoon of British Royale Marines out into the field and pursue them with commercial drones for a month or two. Every time the drone spots the Marines, make them pack up their bivouac and move. Oh, and make sure you do it in the month with the most rainfall possible. I guarantee between the two groups they figure out a way to take these things down using 550 chord and MRE gum.