What the article fails to mention is the blunt facts of the matter. Russian technology will work and ours will not. At least thats the way it was in the seventies. Tube technology works in the face of EMP. At least it did back in the seventies. Perhaps they have developed bigger EMP blasts that also take out tube technology since but I have not heard of this. The whole time we were laughing at the Russian MIGS in the face of the F-15 an EMP blast would have rendered the F-15 useless after an EMP blast. The hardening they speak of is very expensive and never really was enough. Why have fragile transisitor technology and then spend a fortune to sheild it?
Going to submarines may have changed the equation quite a bit. Penetrating water is a whole lot different than penetrating air.
There has also been some non nuclear EMP type devices developed but I think they are very short range. Police forces were talking about using them to knock out car engines from two or three blocks away. I suspect that like the low wave frequency technology for nuclear deep sea subs both the U.S. and the Russians have done a lot research that neither is mentioning.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
