Belgium is deploying German military counter-drone systems and strengthening drone registration enforcement after a wave of unidentified aircraft forced multiple airport closures and exposed critical gaps in European airspace security. The emergency response follows disruptions at Brussels Airport, Liège Airport, and repeated incursions over military bases housing NATO assets.

Germany announced Thursday that the Bundeswehr will provide Belgium with Counter-Small Unmanned Aircraft Systems (C-sUAS) following a formal request from Brussels. An advance Air Force unit has already deployed to Belgium to assess the situation and coordinate defense operations with Belgian forces, according to the German Defense Ministry.

The military assistance comes as Belgian officials convene emergency security meetings and fast-track counter-drone measures after what authorities characterize as coordinated reconnaissance operations targeting critical infrastructure.

Several experts in the drone industry, however, argue that the unidentified drones were in fact a helicopter and an airplane.

Coordinated Incursions Force Airport Shutdowns

Brussels Airport and Liège Airport were forced to halt operations multiple times Tuesday evening after drone sightings in restricted airspace. Brussels Airport suspended flights at 8:00 PM local time, reopened briefly at 9:00 PM, then shut down again at 10:00 PM following additional sightings. Operations didn’t fully resume until 11:00 PM, according to Belgian broadcaster RTBF.

The disruptions cancelled over 50 flights and diverted 24 aircraft to alternative airports including Charleroi, Ostend-Bruges, and facilities in the Netherlands. Thursday morning saw Brussels Airport operations temporarily halted again after renewed sightings, stranding thousands of passengers.

Belgium’s air traffic control spokesperson Skeyes confirmed the closures were triggered by unidentified drones in approach corridors, creating unacceptable safety risks for commercial aviation.

The airport incidents followed multiple drone overflights of Belgian military installations, including four aircraft spotted over Kleine-Brogel Air Base on November 2-3. The facility houses U.S. nuclear weapons and Belgian F-16 fighters, making it one of NATO’s most sensitive installations in Europe.

National Security Council Convenes Emergency Meeting

Prime Minister Bart De Wever convened Belgium’s National Security Council Thursday morning after Belgian security services concluded they have “no reasonable doubt” Russia orchestrated the incursions. Interior Minister Bernard Quintin told international media after the meeting that authorities are “working on the model ‘detection, identification and possible neutralization.’”

Defense Minister Theo Francken announced Belgium will make operational the National Air Security Center (NASC) at Beauvechain military base by January 1, 2026.

“All security services together must obtain a global picture of the airspace,” Francken said, calling the NASC strengthening “the most important measure taken at the National Security Council meeting.”

Belgium is accelerating a €50 million ($57.7 million) counter-drone investment package that includes detection equipment, electronic warfare systems, and kinetic interceptors. The country is also acquiring NASAMS medium-range air defense systems jointly with the Netherlands to provide layered protection for military bases.

Strengthened Registration and Enforcement Measures

Quintin emphasized Belgium is tightening enforcement of drone registration requirements and expanding monitoring capabilities. Under existing European regulations, Belgium already requires operators to register drones weighing over 250 grams (0.55 pounds) or equipped with cameras capable of collecting personal data.

“We do not live in a system where everyone can do whatever they want. We cannot ban all drones, because we also need them for our security,” Quintin told reporters. “But I want to emphasize that you can get 10 to 20 years in prison if you fly a drone over the airport and endanger safety.”

The strengthened measures aim to make unregistered drones automatically identifiable as threats, allowing security services to respond more decisively. Belgian authorities recorded approximately 30,000 drone incidents in 2024, though only twice did aircraft need to change runways due to safety concerns.

This year’s situation has deteriorated dramatically. In just one week, four Belgian airports experienced temporary closures—Brussels and Liège on Tuesday evening, Ostend on Friday, and Deurne on Saturday.

Germany Deploys Counter-Drone Capabilities

German Defense Minister Boris Pistorius and Chief of Defense Carsten Breuer authorized the Bundeswehr deployment as “a clear demonstration of strong security cooperation within the alliance and Europe’s collective capacity to respond to hybrid threats,” according to the Defense Ministry statement.

The advance unit is assessing Belgium’s counter-drone needs and coordinating with Belgian Armed Forces on deployment of detection sensors, electronic warfare jammers, and response protocols. The main German counter-drone unit will follow shortly, though specific systems being deployed remain classified.

Germany’s rapid response reflects lessons from its own drone surveillance crisis. The Bundeswehr has faced over 530 drone sightings at military bases, LNG terminals, and Ukraine supply routes in just the first three months of 2025.

European Pattern of Coordinated Surveillance

According to VRT News, Belgian investigators have concrete leads about the drones’ origins, though no images have been released publicly. The timing coincides with heated debates over Belgium’s role in releasing Russian assets frozen at Euroclear, the Brussels-based European clearing house.

“You must ask yourself who has benefited from this and this is definitely Russia,” Sven Biscop, Director of the Egmont Institute, told Euronews. “I think the effect that it seeks is double. One, it’s intimidation of our decision-makers, perhaps linked to the decisions that has to be made about Euroclear, and two, it is to try to divide the public opinion.”

Denmark experienced similar maritime-launched drone attacks in September, with devices reportedly launched from a Russian “shadow fleet” vessel operating with its transponder disabled approximately 12 kilometers (7.5 miles) off Danish territory. Drones can be controlled from distances of 150 to 200 kilometers (93 to 124 miles), meaning operators aren’t necessarily on Belgian soil.

Russia’s embassy in Brussels has denied any involvement in Belgian airspace violations. Moscow has consistently rejected NATO accusations of drone operations across Europe.

DroneXL’s Take

Belgium’s drone crisis is the latest chapter in what we’ve been tracking as Europe’s sustained counter-UAS emergency—but there’s a critical question we need to address: are we looking at sophisticated military reconnaissance operations, or a continent-wide case of mistaken identity?

Several drone industry experts have suggested the “unidentified drones” over Belgian airports and military bases may have actually been helicopters and airplanes misidentified by observers. This isn’t unprecedented. We saw this exact pattern play out during the New Jersey mystery drones saga last year, where mass hysteria and misidentification of conventional aircraft led to thousands of reported “drone” sightings that turned out to be planes, helicopters, and even planets.

The parallels are striking. In both cases: nighttime observations by untrained observers, no clear images released publicly, electronic countermeasures that “failed” to stop aircraft (because they weren’t drones to begin with), and rapid escalation driven by security concerns rather than hard evidence. When Belgian Defense Minister Francken says drones “evaded pursuit by a helicopter,” it’s worth asking: could observers have been tracking another helicopter or a distant aircraft?

That said, we can’t dismiss Belgium’s concerns entirely. Just three days ago, we covered Belgium authorizing military shootdown authority after three consecutive nights of surveillance over Kleine-Brogel nuclear weapons base. Defense Minister Francken admitted Belgium is “four years behind” where it should be on counter-drone systems, with current capabilities limited to detection sensors, jammers, and handheld “drone guns.”

But here’s what makes Belgium’s situation different from the New Jersey hysteria: the broader European context. In September, Denmark faced seven consecutive days of drone incursions that required NATO to deploy a German warship for air defense during an EU summit. Poland shot down approximately 20 Russian drones that violated its airspace, invoking Article 4 for only the eighth time in NATO history. Germany confirmed in October that military reconnaissance drones—not consumer-grade models—had systematically mapped critical infrastructure including Munich Airport, which was forced to shut down twice.

Those incidents involved classified intelligence assessments, debris recovery, and radar tracking—not just visual sightings. If Belgium’s incidents are part of that coordinated pattern, the threat is real. If they’re misidentified aircraft, then NATO is deploying German military assets and spending €50 million based on aviation illiteracy.

The mandatory registration angle deserves equal scrutiny. Belgium already requires drone registration under EASA rules that took effect in 2020—any drone over 250 grams or equipped with a camera must be registered. What Interior Minister Quintin is really announcing is enforcement escalation and expanded monitoring, not creating a new requirement from scratch. The distinction matters because it shows Belgium’s problem isn’t regulatory gaps—and registration won’t help if the “drones” are actually crewed aircraft.

Now Germany—which itself struggled with military reconnaissance drones shutting Munich Airport twice in October—is sending counter-drone support to its NATO ally. The irony is stark: both nations are scrambling to deploy defensive systems against threats that may or may not be drones at all.

Here’s what we need to see before accepting Belgium’s narrative: actual imagery of the aircraft, radar tracks showing flight patterns inconsistent with conventional aviation, electronic signatures from drone control links, or physical evidence from interdiction attempts. Without that, we’re watching a repeat of the New Jersey panic where thousands of people convinced themselves they were seeing drones when they were actually watching Flight 1437 from Newark.

The most concerning aspect? Belgium’s failed jamming attempts at Kleine-Brogel and Germany’s inability to stop Munich Airport surveillance show that expensive countermeasures aren’t working—but that’s exactly what you’d expect if you’re trying to jam helicopters and airplanes with RF jammers designed for drones. You can’t jam what isn’t receiving drone control signals.

Belgium’s €50 million counter-drone package and German assistance might be necessary investments if Europe truly faces coordinated military drone reconnaissance. Or it might be the most expensive case of aircraft misidentification in NATO history. As we reported yesterday, Germany just approved $563 million for MBDA’s DefendAir counter-drone missiles that won’t reach production until 2029—four years away. If we’re spending billions countering helicopters, that’s a problem.

The truth likely lies somewhere in between. Europe probably has experienced some legitimate military drone incursions (Poland’s shootdowns were real, with debris recovered). But the airport closures and mass sightings? Those might be exactly what happened in New Jersey: a combination of heightened security concerns, untrained observers, and the human tendency to see threats in ambiguous nighttime lights.

Until European authorities release actual evidence—imagery, radar data, electronic intercepts, or recovered hardware—we should view these “drone crises” with healthy skepticism. NATO’s credibility depends on distinguishing between genuine threats and mass misidentification.

What do you think? Are we watching sophisticated military reconnaissance, or the European version of the New Jersey drone panic? Share your thoughts in the comments below.