Miniter on Rice and Missile Defense
April 6, 2004 :: OpinionJournal.com :: Analysis
Brendan Miniter of OpinionJournal.com writes on the situation facing National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and why the criticism of the administration’s position on missile defense is very misplaced. That terrorism is a great threat no one will contest, but the bigger picture of national security also requires significant attention to missile defense. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Policy
Center for Security Policy on Rice and Missile Defense
April 5, 2004 :: Center for Security Policy :: Analysis
The Center for Security Policy has released a fine position piece pointing out that the charges against Condoleezza Rice and the administration’s alleged emphasis on missile defense at the expense of terrorism are quite wrong headed. The logic of Rice’s speech intended for 9-11 retains its integrity and applicability even today. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Policy
New Space Defenses: A Return to Brilliant Pebbles?
March 30, 2004 :: ABC News :: News
ABC News describes recent reports that the US is moving toward missile defenses in space, specifically the Missile Defense Agency’s Near Field Infrared Experiment (NFIRE) program, a form of tracking system which may also include an interceptor which could then be directed toward an incoming missile.
ABC makes far too much of the defensive interceptor’s potential for “weaponizing” space. It is the missiles themselves which have truly weaponized space. Any long range missile, such as those Russia and China have armed with nuclear weapons, would travel through space. Much of a missile’s flight time is spent in space, so the use of space would be used as a platform for defensive systems only makes sense.
What is not noted by recent coverage of such programs, however, is that such an interceptor, still in the design stage, would appear to resembles the laudable “Brilliant Pebbles” program begun under President Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative. Brilliant Pebbles consisted of a small, partly autonomous constellation of satellites which would first detect a missile launch, then release a watermelon-sized interceptor which would collide with an oncoming missile fairly early in its travels. Funding for the Brilliant Pebbles program was cut in the early 1990s, under the Clinton administration.
A renewed interest in the promising program may also be seen in the develoment of other miniaturization technologies. Earlier this year, Lockheed Martin received a contract to develop a Miniature Kill Vehicle (MKV). Unfortunately, such systems are, at best, in only the design stage, and are not being pursued aggresively. ABC’s warning of space weaponization is, therefore, quite misplaced. To the extent that such programs would be pursued pursued, however, it would be all for the better. (Article, Link)
» Feb. 9, 2004: Lockheed gets MKV contract
» Mar. 25 Press Release on NFIRE
» More stories on: Policy, Space-Based Systems
» Missile system details for: Brilliant Pebbles
U.S.-Russian BMD Cooperation Expected to Continue
March 30, 2004 :: News
The March 30 edition of Aerospace Daily reports that the NATO-Russian missile defense joint efforts are likely to continue without major problems, quoting NATO Secretary General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer as saying that he foresees “no major hiccups” in the future efforts.
Such cooperation may be salutary insofar as it encourages American missile defense efforts from its domestic opponents, but carries with it the spectre of limiting or otherwise rendering ineffective a missile defense capable of defending the US from the greatest and most strategic threats, that from the Russian and Chinese missile arsenals. (Link)
» More stories on: Policy, Russia, Russian Missile Defenses
Senator Introduces Legislation to Aide International Cooperation for Missile Defense
March 29, 2004 :: News
Senator Wayne Allard plans ot introduce legislation to ease restrictions on the cooperation of would-be allies in missile defense such as Japan and Australia, reports the Aviation Week & Space Technology. The legislation would tie the international cooperation procedures with the preexisting Missile Technology Control Regime, of 33 countries, to expedite transfers of defense technology to such countries who have already pledged not to transfer it to others. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Allies, Policy
Sec. of Navy: U.S. to Deploy Aegis Destroyer in Sea of Japan This Year
March 23, 2004 :: Reuters :: News
In addition to the land-based interceptors at Fort Greeley, Alaska, the United States will also be deploying an Aegis cruiser as part of the missile defense deployment scheduled to take place by September 30, according to Gordon England, Secretary of the Navy, speaking in commemoration of the 21st anniversary of Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI).
The announcement comes as good news, indicating that deployment is on schedule, and that the land-based system will be supplemented and expanded. (More »»»)
» Text of Secretary England’s remarks on missile defense
» Japan pleased with US plans to deploy Aegis
» Sec. England outlines plan through 2006
» More stories on: China, North Korea, Policy, Sea-Based Systems
» Missile system details for: Aegis Ship-Based BMD
Hackett on SDI Anniversary, Plans for 2004 Deployment
March 23, 2004 :: Washington Times :: Analysis
James T. Hackett of the Heritage Foundation discusses the Strategic Defense Initiative embarked upon by Ronald Reagan, and the steps President Bush is taking this year toward making that goal a reality. (Article, Link)
» More stories on: Analysis, Policy
Kadish: No Space Defenses Yet
March 22, 2004 :: News
At a March 22 missile defense conference held by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, General Ronald Kadish, head of the Missile Defense Agency, told the gathering the U.S. would not yet be pursuing space-based missile defenses, because we do not yet need them, based on the “threats we face at this particular time in the evolution of the missile defense systems.” Kadish however added that this “situation may or may not last a long time.”
Kadish prudently left the door open for space-based interceptors, by citing the need for an evolving layered defense. But the fact is that the need for space-based interceptors exists now.
The land-based systems is Alaska are well designed to provide a foundation for a defense against a very few long-range missiles launched from a country such as Iran or North Korea. But there are at least two sorts of attacks the interceptors to be deployed in Alaska this year will not defend against: large strategic attacks from Russia or China, or small attacks from off our coast, in the form of a short-range missile fired from a ship against a U.S. city. In the former case, the number of interceptors is dwarfed by our enemies’ strategic arsenals, and in the latter, the flight time of the missile is simply too short and too brief for a land-based interceptor at any but the closest distance to have time to intercept it. Space-based lasers, by contrast, could have an almost instantaneous reaction time, and destroy even the short range missile during its most vulnerable ascent, or boost-phase.
As Republican Senator Wayne Allard of Colorado noted at the same meeting, space-based missile defense systems are cost-effective and “will add considerably to our defense posture.” No reliable defense against short-range ship-launched missiles, or long-range strategic attacks with a number of missiles, can do without space. Space will be, as Donald Rumsfeld has said, space is “essential to the future of modern warfare.” Without space, missile defenses are unlikely to provide for the truly strategic defense of the United States. (Link)
» Dec. 10, 2003: Rumsfeld: BMD is “America’s highest priority”
» More stories on: Policy, Space-Based Systems
Taiwan Missile Defense Referendum Gets 90% of Vote, But Doesn’t Pass Due to Turnout
March 21, 2004 :: Taiwan News :: News
On March 20, Taiwan held its first-ever referenda in conjunction with the presidential election, one of which concerned the deployment of further missile defenses should China fail to withdraw its missile buildup near Taiwan. Although the missile defense referendum is not legally binding due to a technicality (only 45% of eligible voters participated, 50% is required to be binding), the overwhelming majority of the voters who did participate (90%) were in favor of the missile defense resolution, which read as follows:
The People of Taiwan demand that the Taiwan Strait issue be resolved through peaceful means. Should Mainland China refuse to withdraw the missiles it has targeted at Taiwan and to openly renounce the use of force against us, would you agree that the Government should acquire more advanced anti-missile weapons to strengthen Taiwan’s self-defense capabilities?
(More »»»)
» U.S. to sponsor UN resolution condemning Chinese human rights abuses
» Chen presidential acceptance speech
» Press conference for foreign press
» More stories on: China, Policy, Taiwan
Simulation of North Korean Attack Shows Need for Layered Defense, Additional Interceptors
March 17, 2004 :: New York Times :: News
A missile defense simulation held in Washington invited a number of reporters to step into the roles of key strategic decisionmakers. In the simulation, a fictitious nation “Midland” located in the Sea of Japan—closely resembling North Korea—fires six missiles at the United States. All six are eventually intercepted, though the six American interceptors are depleted, and after one misses, the role-players were briefly faced with the need to choose between saving Anchorage and Boise, Idaho. Fortunately, the air borne laser which was part of the simulation destroyed two missiles, and disaster was averted.
The simulation should teach three clear lessons:
1). The ballistic missile threat is quite real, as an all-too believable attack from a country in the Sea of Japan should demonstrate. Missile defense is therefore clearly needed, as well as clearly possible. Arguments that it is impossible to hit a bullet with a bullet are relics of the past, and should be regarded as such.
2). The need for a layered defense. Were it not for air-borne lasers to knock out two of the missiles in their most vulnerable boost-phase, one of the missiles would have reached its target, and either Anchorage or Boise would have been destroyed.
In his description of the event, missile defense opponent Bradley Graham of the Washington Post complains that the ABL was involved in the simulation, even though the ABL will not be part of the initial deployment in 2004. And indeed, there are good reasons for this, given the ABL’s limited capability. The need for a more reliable boost-phase interceptor, ideally one which is space-based, is the more logical policy pursuit.
3). The third and most obvious lesson was the need for a greater numbers of interceptors. In the exercise, only six were available, and they were all very nearly depleted. In fact, the administration will probably deploy nine this year. Nevertheless, there is no reason to believe an attack upon the territorial US and our troops in the region would be limited to six or nine missiles.
The reporters’ relish for the tension of the simulation threatens to obscure the fact that a failure to intercept a nuclear missile would probably result in a constitutional crisis. But another problem arises which is not considered. The prospect of such a “Sophie’s choice” between one city and another is exactly the sort of nuclear blackmail which the United States, defenseless against any such attack, is susceptible to. Would a president come to terms if North Korea threatened to obliterate a major U.S. city, and had the capability to fire off more missiles than we had interceptors?
Caught up in the sensation of the exercise, both the New York Times and the Washington Post fail to note that the simulation closely follows upon a joint Russian-US missile defense exercise. The illustrated limitations no doubt pleased the Russians watching from Moscow eager for confirmation that the U.S. systems pose no threat to Russia’s still massive nuclear arsenal. (Article, Link)
» Wash. Post description of simulation
» More stories on: Policy, Testing - American
