It seems like the situation was resolved in the best way possible. It is not that Galileo was harder to jam, but that jamming Galileo would also mean jamming their own GPS. So they settled on using different frequencies, which means you can jam one without jamming the other, and vice versa.

Also, possibly as a result of these negotiations, the US said they will stop using selective availability for GPS.

For me, that's the best solution for everyone, at least in times of peace. And in times of war, well, all bets are off anyways.

That's not what the link you provided says.

The new Galileo frequency is just as hard to jam as the original frequency. The change was made to allow blocking or jamming of one GNSS without affecting the other.

What makes a frequency easy to jam?

> At issue is the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) desire to be able to jam other radionavigation signals in a theater of operation so as to provide an edge to allied users of military GPS receivers. This "selective denial" capability would be complicated by the presence of an encrypted PRS signal atop the M-code bands, because the U.S. could not jam the PRS without jamming its own signals.

There's some more info here: https://arquivo.pt/wayback/20090628141907/http://findarticle...

>The frequency initially chosen for Galileo would have made it impossible for the US to block the Galileo signals without also interfering with its own GPS signals.

Not an answer to your question but it was more about being able to jam GNSS while still being able to use GPS.

That would actually be the sane solution against stupid warfare..

That frequency not being the same as the one used by the US’s own GNSS system enabling them to block it without blocking their own service.

And vice versa.