MissileThreat.com

Lawrence Livermore Improves Laser Capabilities, Sets New Record

Scientists at the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory have set a new record for laser power in a recent experiment, with some 29.7 kilowatts. Using a refrigerator size laser powered by lithium cells, the scientists constructed a beam capable of penetrating a half-inch of steel in under a second.
        Such capabilities are directly significant for missile interception technology. Continued development of smaller, more potent, and efficient lasers is all for the better for the future of missile interception. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: High Energy Defenses

North Korea Slams US BMD

Responding in part to recent announcement of plans to deploy Aegis sea-based missile interceptors in the Sea of Japan, North Korea is complaining vigorously of U.S. missile defense efforts. This should come as no surprise, since they among many potential missile threats have the most to lose from the system to be deployed in 2004.
        The state-run Minju Joson newspaper reported that the “frantic” American efforts for missile defense are part of an invariable ambition for world domination, which will forces North Korea to increase its “self-defense” forces—i.e, offensive ballistic missiles.
        That North Korea talks the talk of an arms race against the United States shows something of the absurdity of mutually assured destruction.  (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: North Korea

New Space Defenses: A Return to Brilliant Pebbles?

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

Russia’s New Strategic Weapons Again Touted

On Monday March 29, Russian news sources Interfax and Itar-Tass reported an unidentified senior defense ministry official as commenting that Russia was developing “revolutionary” strategic systems which would “nullify” and render “useless” American missile defenses. The story has been widely reported through the Associated Press and CNN, as well as a host of other news bodies, as a sort of “mystery” weapon easily able to overcome U.S. missile defenses.
        Remarkable about the recent report, however, is that there is nothing new being reported that was not said over a month ago, during the February war exercise. Links to the very similar reports are included below. One possible explanation is that the otherwise repetitive press conference was meant to follow upon the American test of the X-43 scramjet over the weekend. The “hypersonic” weapon and penetration aids for warheads to aide in the evasion of missile defenses during their reentry are not in themselves new concepts, but it could be that these sorts of Russian programs resemble the scramjet technology in some way.
        It is important to recognize that the Russian claims of superiority, even on their face, are not all that revolutionary, and do not constitute such superiority after all. Indeed, though CNN talks of a “mystery” and “revolutionary” weapon, BBC cites the unnamed defense official as saying that they would be only “almost revolutionary.” Should the United States wish to overcome scramjet or other technologies with countermeasure applications, it has the capabilities available in laser weapons. Even a scramjet engine would have to travel for some time before being able to deliver a nuclear weapon to its destination. Space-based laser weapons which could target the missile during its slowest and most vulnerable phase, the boost-phase, still remain a viable option, and a realm in which defensive measures are not trumped by offensive ones.
        The Monday story cites the Defense Ministry official as again bragging of Russian missile defense capabilities, noting that “the new military projects, if implemented, can effectively nullify completely the anti-missile defence system that is being developed in the USA.” Russia’s own missile defense efforts are not to be forgotten, and it is true that they have the potential to exceed American capabilities, at least in the near future.  (Article, Link) 

» Feb 27, 2004: New Russian missiles by end of decade

» Feb 18, 2004: Russia’s new strategic weapons systems

» More stories on: Russia, Russian Missile Defenses

U.S.-Russian BMD Cooperation Expected to Continue

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

Gaffney on the Threat From China

Frank Gaffney of the Center for Security Policy perceptively notes the danger the exclusive attention on post 9-11 commission poses, the neglect of another more strategic threat, namely that from Communist China. (Article, Link) 

» Center for Security Policy report on the neglected threat from China

» More stories on: Analysis, China

Senator Introduces Legislation to Aide International Cooperation for Missile Defense

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

Russia Newspaper: Strategic Exercises, ICBM Launches, Aimed at the United States

When Russia conducted its massive February war exercises, simulating the use of nuclear-armed ballistic missiles, it was disclaimed as having nothing to do with the United States. Rather, it was officially billed as an anti-terrorism exercise. At the time, we noted here that this was preposterous, and that the true target of the largest strategic exercise in 20 years was, of course, the United States.
        Now the Russian newspaper Nezavisimaya Gazeta appears to confirm this assessment, reporting that the (failed) ICBM test launches planned for February 15 and 16 were a Soviet-style demonstration of power aimed at Russia’s “military-strategic opposite number,” the United States. “In Soviet times everything was clear: the military-industrial complex and an army of many millions existed because of oil exports…Now it appears that history is repeating itself: The country’s gold and foreign-currency reserves are in excess of $80 billion and continue to grow because of high world oil prices. So the ‘Soviet syndrome’…has come into operation.”
        The strategic interests of a revitalized Russia should be conceived to be similar to those of its predecessor, the Soviet Union. It is for precisely this reason that missile defense efforts keep as their ultimate object the strategic defense of the United States, that is, the defense against not only rogue nations but potential missile attack from Russia.  (Link) 

» More stories on: Russia

North Korea Offering Missiles to Myanmar (Burma)

North Korea’s marketing of its ballistic missiles is certainly an ambitious one, and in addition to its many mideastern clients, has recently included Myanmar, previously called Burma.
        Matthew Daley, deputy assistant secretary in the bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs in the State Department, testified before the House International Relations Committee, Subcommittee on Asia and the Pacific and Subcommittee on International Terrorism, Nonproliferation and Human Rights, that North Korea has offered to sell missiles to Myanmar:

Of particular concern, we also have reason to believe that the D.P.R.K. has offered surface-to-surface missiles. We have raised this issue of possible missile transfers with senior Burmese officials and registered our concerns in unambiguous language. Although Burmese officials have indicated that they have not accepted offers of such weapons systems, we will continue to monitor the situation and will deal with it vigorously and rapidly.

        Myanmar, or Burma, is among the countries listed by the department of the Treasury as having restrictions placed upon them under US law.  (Article, Link) 

» State Dept. Transcript of Daley’s Testimony

» Dept. of Treasury overview of country sanctions

» More stories on: North Korea, Proliferation

Announcing Missilethreat.com

On the twenty-first anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative speech, the Claremont Institute is pleased to announce a revision of our website devoted to missile defense, missilethreat.com. (Article, Link) 

Sec. of Navy: U.S. to Deploy Aegis Destroyer in Sea of Japan This Year

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

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

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

Al Qaeda’s Ballistic Missile and WMD Plans

Pakistan’s Khabrain newspaper of March 12 claims that Al-Qaeda has for the past year been preparing chemical- and nuclear-armed ballistic missiles somewhere within Afghanistan for use aganist the United States, as noted by the American Foreign Policy Council. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Nuclear Weapons, Proliferation, Terrorism

Taiwan Missile Defense Referendum Gets 90% of Vote, But Doesn’t Pass Due to Turnout

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

India Tests Prithvi II Missile, Plans Agni III Test

Pakistan and India continue to exchange missile tests. On Tuesday, March 9, Pakistan tested its Shaheen II nuclear capable missile. Pakistan shortly thereafter announced it would be making other tests during the year. Now today, on March 19, India responded with a test of its Prithvi II, also nuclear capable. And on March 23, India is reported to also be planning another test of its more advanced, 3000km range Agni III sometime in 2004. (Article, Link) 

» Mar. 23: Wash. Times: India to test Agni III this year

» Oct. 2003: Agni III test originally postponed till January 2004

» More stories on: India, Testing - Foreign

» Missile details: Agni-2, Prithvi-2

Chinese Assassination Attempt?: Taiwan President Shot on Day Before Election, Missile Defense Referendum

One day before the Taiwanese presidential election and referendum, which asks voters whether the island nation should deploy missile defenses in response to the continued Chinese missile buildup, Taiwanese president Chen is shot while campaigning. Fortunately he was only wounded, having been shot in the stomach.
        If not directly the work of Beijing, China is likely pleased by the turn of events. China has been bullying Taiwan for months, unhappy with Taiwanese efforts to deploy missile defenses to defend themselves. Only yesterday, Bill Gertz reported in the Washington Times that China has tested “at least” five missiles since January, in anticipation of the referendum. And on Tuesday, China will be holding a large naval exercise with France, which is also perceived by Taiwan as an attempt at intimidation.
        Tomorrow’s election and referendum will determine whether the Taiwanese, like the Spanish, can be bullied into becoming doormats. Or will this attack embolden them against their communist aggressors to the north?  (Article, Link) 

» BBC: China plans large naval exercise, Taiwan views as intimidation

» More stories on: China, Taiwan

Israeli-Developed Phalcon Claimed Able to “Neutralize” Pakistani Missile

Israel’s Phalcon system, previously sold to India, is capable of “neutralizing” Pakistan’s Shaheen II ballisic missile, according to a news report, which came just after Pakistan’s test of the Shaheen II on March 16.
        It is unclear in what sense the early warning/spy plane can neutralize the Pakistani missile, unless it is meant that it would be used in concjunction with a missile defense system.
        India is also considering purchasing the U.S. Patriot, the Russian S-300, and the Israeli Arrow missile defense systems. (Article, Link) 

» FAS description of Phalcon system

» Mar. 4, 2004: Israel-India Phalcon deal

» Mar. 1: Pakistan complains of Phalcon

» More stories on: India, Israel, Pakistan

Chinese Bullying Continues: Five Missile Tests in Advance of Taiwan Referendum

U.S. intelligence officials report that China has carried “at least” five missile tests since January, according to Bill Gertz in the Washington Times. The report comes just two days before Taiwan conducts its referendum on missile defense.
        The five tests are said to have included four types of missiles, the medium-range DF-21, the long-range DF-31, and the short-range DF-11 and DF-15. The missiles are all said to have been launched from the Wuzhai missile testing center in central China, and were directed toward the western part of the country.
        China currently has about 500 missiles within range of Taiwan, a number which continues to increase at a rate of 75 per year.
        “These tests make a mockery of all the efforts made by Washington to suppress the Taiwan missile referendum,” said Richard Fisher, a specialist on the Chinese military with the Center for Security Policy.  (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: China, Proliferation, Taiwan

Simulation of North Korean Attack Shows Need for Layered Defense, Additional Interceptors

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

Russia Opposes Taiwan Independence

On strategic Russia and China continue to exhibit a united front against the United States.
        Secretary of the Russian Security Council Igor Ivanov announced today to Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo that Russia opposes Taiwan independence and supports Chinese efforts to subordinate the island to Communist rule. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: China, Russia, Taiwan

Russia Tests Two SLBMs: Russian Arsenal Combat Ready

The Novomoskovsk nuclear submarine in Russia’s Northern Fleet today tested two RSM-54 (SS-N-23) intercontinental missiles, from a submerged position in the Barents Sea. The missiles are said to have hit their target at the the Kura testing ground on the far eastern Kamchatka peninsula, reportedly some 4,500 miles away. Versions of the SS-N-23 are called “Sineva” by Russia, and “Scythian” or “Skiff” in the West. The “Sineva” version, that tested today, is believed to be armed with 10 warheads rather than the usual four, and an additional system to permit it to penetrate missile defenses.
        The two missile tests follow Putin’s March 1 order that the failed launches during the massive February 10-18 nuclear war exercise be repeated.  (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Russia, Testing - Foreign

» Missile details: SS-X-14

China and Pakistan Surpassing North Korea as Chief Missile Proliferators to Mideast

When it comes to missile proliferation, its no easy to task to better North Korea. But China and its ally, Pakistan, seem intent on doing so.
        As North Korea’s proliferation has slowed due to international pressure, the mideast missile market, countries such as Iran and Syria, are seeking out other standbys, reports East-Asia-Intel.com. North Korea has been said to have sold $580 million worth of missiles to the mideast in 2001. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: China, North Korea, Pakistan, Proliferation

The Struggle for Space

In the March edition of Air Force Magazine, editor Robert S. Dudney describes the essential character of space for future warfare. Currently, the U.S. is extremely dependent upon its space assets for military operations, but has virtually no means of protecting the same, despite advances in space technology by potential enemies—such as China.
        Dudney addresses what is one of the most critical obstacles to serious missile defenses, the aversion to putting defenses in space under the mistaken assumption that they constitute some devious “weaponization of space.” The fact is that space is an essential element to American security, and we must choose to defend it, or not. Dudley goes on, however, to say that the Air Force increasingly sees the need for such defenses, and references a recent “Strategic Master Plan” paper by Space Command, “that places unprecedented emphasis on the need for ‘counterspace’ capabilities.” Nevertheless,

Unless the US makes a course correction, it will, at some point, probably suffer a serious attack on its assets in space, one that would hamper its military operations. Seen in that light, USAF’s space proposals seem not only sensible but restrained.

 (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Space-Based Systems

First NATO-Russia Joint Missile Defense Exercise Should Raise Concern for Future of U.S. BMD

Under NATO auspices, the U.S. recently held a five-day joint missile defense exercise with Russia, lasting from March 8-12. The first such event was held at the U.S. space center in Colorado Springs, with some 60 participants from 10 NATO nations and Russia. While the exercise was quite limited, such cooperation should be viewed with some level of suspicion. Such joint exercises threaten to erode the sort of strategic clarity necessary to remember that Russia is not an ally, but indeed rather our “strategic competitor.” The concrete effect of such strategic obfuscation is that American missile defenses will not evolve into robust and comprehensive defenses capable of defending, but will be sharply limited to intercepting only second rate missiles from third rate countries.
        The Command Post Exercise (CPX) consisted of computer simulations designed to “test equipment compatibility and other technical issues” related to “theatre missile defense,” i.e., those systems capable of intercepting short-range missiles.
        Such cooperation has evolved from initial efforts in the mid-1990s under the Clinton administration. Missile defense cooperation may appear innocuous, even salutary. Yet there should also be a legitimate concern should these steps lead to more substantial cooperation, which prevents the limited missile defenses being deployed in Alaska and elsewhere from evolving into a defense capable of defending not only against rogue states, but especially against the Russian nuclear arsenal.
        Such a partnership would effectively treat Russia as no less a threat than other nuclear powers such as Britain or France. As such, we would not even attempt to evolve our defenses to a level capable of defending against Russia or China. So far from missile defense’s promise overthrowing the dangerous doctrines of mutually assured destruction (MAD) or “strategic stability,” partnerships with Russia in the area of missile defense would only ensure that teh former Soviet Union retains the ability to threaten America with nuclear weapons for decades to come.
        The NATO press releases emphasize the importance of “interoperability.” During the Cold War, interoperability, familiarily with allies’ systems, and interchangeable parts generally were important to unite NATO forces against a common enemy, the Soviet Union. Is America really prepared to trust the former Soviet Union as such an ally? We should not be.  (Article, Link) 

» NATO description of joint exercise

» Feb. 20, 2001: Bush Proposes Joint US-Russia BMD

» More stories on: Policy, Russia, Testing - American

Pakistan’s Hatf III Missile Ready for Service

The March 2004 edition of Janes Missiles and Rockets reports that Pakistan’s Hatf III, or Ghaznavi, missile is ready for service. The Hatf III is based on the Chinese M-11 (CSS-7). (Link) 

» Mar. 9: Pakistan tests Hatf-6 (Shaheen II)

» More stories on: Pakistan, Proliferation

» Missile details: Hatf 3

Iran Seeks Cruise Missile to Overcome U.S. Missile Defenses

Geostrategy-direct quotes U.S. officials as saying that in addition to its ballistic missile capabilities Iran is also developing a cruise missile designed to overcome potential defenses, such as the Patriot missile. The missile with a range of 300km and based on the Chinese HY-2, would be part of a multi-layered force to supplement such ballistic missiles as the Shahab 3 and Shahab 4. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Iran, Proliferation

Grant on BMD and America’s Founding Principles

Claremont Institute Fellow John Grant reminds us why our founding principles require us to defend against ballistic missile attack. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: ABM Treaty, Analysis, Policy

Iran Defiant; Will Continue to Enrich Uranium

All too frequently, Americans hear that the only threat to the United States in the twenty-first century will come from terrorists. The reality, however, is that many nations continue to develop advances nuclear technologies despite UN sanctions and threats of suspended aid packages—and, in some cases, with the assistance of signatories to non-proliferation documents, such as Russia and China.
        Despite U.S. protests, Iran continues to advance its uranium enrichment program that is capable of developing first-rate nuclear warheads. Officially, weapons technology is sold by Russia for use in civilian reactors but the degree of enrichment Iran has been trying to acquire is far more consistent with high yield nuclear weapons. Here, again, is yet another example that export controls and non-proliferation measures, while important and laudatory, may ultimately be insufficient in the absence of extraordinarily strong political will—and even in its presence. The former Soviet Union is a signatory of the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty, where it pledged “not in any way assist, encourage, or induce any non-nuclear-weapon state to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons.” Such is the reliability of paper restrictions on proliferation.
        Once completed, Iranian nuclear warheads might be deployed on the Shahab-6 ballistic missile, the longest-range missile Iran is believed to have in development, which is believed to be able to travel some 6,000km. That Iran continues to pursue long range missiles to complement its nascent nuclear warheads is clear, as illustrated by their recent announcement of their intention to extend the range of the Shahab-3.  (Article, Link) 

» Feb. 25, 2004: Iran upgrading range of Shahab-3

» Mar. 11, 2004: Russia opposes UN resolution against Iran

» More stories on: Iran, Proliferation

» Missile details: SS-1B 'Scud A'

Libya May Retain Scud B Missiles

Although Libya has given up its missile and WMD programs, it may be permitted to retain some SCUDs for “defensive” purposes. However, those retained would be SCUD-Bs; the more advanced and capable Scud-Cs, made with Norht Korea help, are being shipped to the United States.
        “The Scud Bs are pretty old. If you had to make a choice between Scud Cs and Scud Bs—which one would you eliminate first—we got the right ones,” said a senior U.S. official, quoted by Reuters.
         So much for disarming Libya. While there are only 5 Scud-Cs being given up, there are possibly some 240 Scud-Bs in Libya’s possession. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Libya

» Missile details: Scud C variant

Pakistan Tests Nuclear Capable Shaheen II

Pakistan today tested a Shaheen II (Hatf-6), nuclear capable missile with a reported range of between 2,000 and 3,000km. The missile is capable of reaching all of India’s major cities, and reportedly has multiple warheads. (Article, Link) 

» U.S. asks Pakistan to reduce missile tests

» Pakistan to conduct more missile tests

» More stories on: Pakistan, Testing - Foreign

» Missile details: Hatf 6

Tenet: China’s Defense Budget Twice What They Report; Continue to Acquire Missiles From Russia

Testifying before the Armed Services Committee, CIA Director George Tenet expressed the “greatest concern” with China’s military buildup.

China’s neighbors still harbor suspicions about Beijing’s long-term intentions. They generally favor a sustained US military presence in the region as insurance against potential Chinese aggression.

Our greatest concern remains China’s military buildup, which continues to accelerate. On Saturday, China’s Minister of Finance announced a new defense budget that is 11.6 percent larger than last year’s. China’s announced annual defense budget has grown from some $7 billion ten years ago to over $25 billion today. Moreover, we assess the announced figure accounts for less than half of China’s actual defense spending.

Last year, Beijing reached new benchmarks in its production or acquisition from Russia of missiles, submarines, other naval combatants, and advanced fighter aircraft. China also is downsizing and restructuring its military forces with an eye toward enhancing its capabilities for the modern battlefield. All of these steps will over time make China a formidable challenger if Beijing perceived that its interests were being thwarted in the region.

 (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: China, Proliferation, Russia

European Missile Warning Satellites

While not purusing active missile defenses, France may be waking up to the need for such systems. Alcatel Space, a subsidiary of the French communications company Alcatel, appears to be now set to build missile early warning satellites for the European space company, EADS, according to Reuters. The contract is for the Systeme Preparatoire Infra-Rouge pur l’Alerte (SPIRALE) project, meaning infra-red early alert system. The two satellites could be launched in 2008.
        Update: The March issue of Janes Missiles and Rockets confirms the report by Reuters. (Link) 

» More stories on: Allies, Technology

Aegis Sale to Taiwan Initially Approved

In the weekly Inside the Ring, Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough note that the Pentagon has now for the first time approved the sale of the Aegis cruiser battle-management systems, which include the sea-based missile defense program.
        As noted here, the Aegis system includes a large phased-array radar with a range to track objects of some hundreds of miles, and include satellites in space. The Aegis is described as the “core” of the sea-based missile defense system, now set to be deployed for the defense of America in 2005.
        The approved sale comes less than two weeks before the March 20 referendum in Taiwan over whether missile defenses are the right response to the nearby Chinese missile buildup. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Allies, Policy, Sea-Based Systems, Taiwan

» Missile system details for: Aegis Ship-Based BMD

Russian Engineers Aided Iraq’s Long Range Ballistic Missile Programs

As often emphasized here, the greatest sources of ballistic missile proliferation are ultimately Russia and China, however much rogue state proxies may sometimes be involved. A story in today’s New York Times confirms this unappreciated fact, outlining how Russian ballistic missile technology aided Saddam Hussein’s missile programs until not too long before last year’s war.
       The assistance of Russian engineers to Iraq’s missile programs constituted a violation of the United Nations sanctions. Like Russia’s assistance of Iran reported here yesterday, such aid also constitutes a reminder that Russia’s interests in proliferation are quite different than those of the United States. Russia’s contempt for parchment barriers such as UN resolutions or the Non-Proliferation Treaty would appear to be similar to that they had for the ABM Treaty, which they clearly violated.
       It is worth nothing that whatever the status of Iraq’s formerly documented WMD programs, their work on ballistic missiles until just before the war began is undisputed.  (Article, Link) 

» Mar. 4, 2004: Russia Providing Equipment for Iranian Missiles

» Ties to Ukraine, Belarus, Serbia, North Korea

» More stories on: Iraq, Proliferation, Russia

China Resisted Inquiry Into Their Aid of Pakistan’s Nuclear Program

The National Security Archive project at George Washington University has documented a number of previously classified documents which indicate that China was permitted to rebuff inquiries by the United States, over the course of three presidencies, into the nature of the Chinese assistance of Pakistan with their nuclear program.
        The documents illustrating China’s refusal only confirm, however, what has been obvious for some time, that China aided Pakistan with their nuclear program in order to permit Pakistan to counterbalance India, which borders China and is their geopolitical rival. At another level, however, they serve as a reminder that the real roots of proliferation stem not from individuals working alone, such as A. Q. Kahn, but from regimes themselves—and not primarily “rogue states” but most especially from the major rivals and threats to America, Russia and China. The major threats, in other words, are not so “asymmetrical,” but rather “strategic.”  (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: China, Nuclear Weapons, Pakistan

Patriot (PAC-3) Missile Intercept Test a Success

A Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) missile interceptor successfully destroyed a mock tactical ballistic missile, known as a “Patriot-As-A-Target” (PAAT), during a test at the White Sands Missile Range. Two PAC-3 interceptors were “ripple fired”—that is, fired one after another, a few seconds apart, both independently tracking the incoming target and homing in on it. The first interceptor destroyed the target, in this case likely a modified PAC-2, which had been made to simulate a SCUD short range missile. The second missile subsequently self-destructed.
        The highly successful PAC-3 interceptor has performed in the recent Iraq war, and will now also be used for the MEADS defense system. (More »»») 

» MDA press release on PAC-3 intercept

» More stories on: Land-Based Systems, Testing - American

» Missile system details for: Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3)

Israel to Build Airship to Track Missiles

Precise monitoring and tracking of incoming ballistic missiles is an important element to defend against them. In recent months, the US has begun research on a High Altitude Airship, a necxt-generation blimp, to do just this. Now Israel has followed suit, and begun to develop its own such device. Theirs would be 200 yards long and 60 yards wide, would remain at 70,000 feet above the surface for years, and would be capable of tracking missiles up to 600 miles away. (Link) 

» More stories on: Air, Israel, Technology

» Missile system details for: High Altitude Airship (Blimp)

Study on China’s Stance Toward U.S. BMD, China’s Own Missile Defenses

A study prepared by the Institute for Defense Analysis (IDA) for the Defense Intelligence Agency outlines both China’s likely response and attitudes toward U.S. ballistic missile defense, and China’s own missile defense efforts and systems.
        The study, dated September 2003, divides the treatment of China’s strategic position towards missile defenses into 5 periods, beginning in 1955 and ending with 2002.
        The outline of Chinese strategic doctrine from that of the Mao years, when nuclear weapons were regarded as just another weapon, through China’s very reluctant acceptance of something like mutually assured destruction, shows a policy which has not followed the same track as that of the United States in its nuclear thinking. Unlike Russia and domestic left-wing opponents, for example, China apparently may have considered Reagan’s SDI as potentially stabilizing.
        Most interesting, however, is the (admittedly little) light shed on China’s own ballistic missile programs, which around 1964, when Chairman Mao ordered a long term BMD research. According to various sources cited, the program included a team of 8-10 scientists, a cost of some $100 million dollars, is described as having paralleled U.S. and Soviet research during the period, until Deng Xiaping allegedly cancelled the program in 1983. Another source cited, however, claims that there was a Program 640 which set out to field a viable defense which included “a kinetic kill vehicle, a high powered laser, space early warning, and target discrimination system components.” The study also notes that Secretary McNamara apparently hinted at such Chinese BMD developments in 1966. There is also evidence that China was weighing both a land-based defense and a space based defense in the 1980s. The study notes the plausibility of Chinese missile defenses patterned after Soviet and (previous) American interceptors which were nuclear-tipped, but hastily steps back to say that there is no evidence for this “in the literature surveyed for this essay.”
        The study describes an “acceleration and expansion of China’s own efforts to build a missile defense system” during the 1990s. In addition to some 100 or more SA-300 air and missile defense interceptors acquired from Russia, China apparently also began work on the “Patriot-like” HQ-9 interceptor, and another with an extended range based on America’s more advanced PAC-3. One factor pushing this acceleration was concern for the need to defend the Three Gorges Dam—where China is believed to have such missile defenses currently deployed. (Article, Link) 

» More stories on: Analysis, China, Chinese Missile Defenses, Proliferation

Asst. Secretary of State for Arms Control: “Russia should do better”

Stephen Rademaker, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Arms Control, during his visit to Russia gave an interview published by the Russkii Kurier, where he indicated that Russia continues to contribute to the proliferation of ballistic missile systems and technology, here specifically in regard to Iran:

I informed my Russian colleagues that according to the information the US Department of State possesses, Iranian medium- and short-range missiles were equipped with Russian gear. It means that Russia should do better in implementing the treaty on nonproliferation of missile technologies. Russian colleagues assure me that Moscow sticks to the letter of the treaty and honors it, but I consider the matter open all the same.

        Besides North Korea, Iran is the rogue state probably most likely to next develop long range ICBMs which could reach the United States.  (More »»») 

» More stories on: Iran, Proliferation, Russia

Russia Transferring S-300 Air/Missile Defense Systems to Belarus

Some reports of Russia’s transfer of S-300 air and missile defenses to Belarus claim the systems are old and useless. Others, however, indicate that they may still be in working order.
        The transfer consists of S-300s which are being taken out of service. One report has Acting Russian Defense Minister Sergey Ivanov describing them to journalists as “not in an operational condition.” Another, from ITAR-TASS, has the same person saying that they are in operable condition. A third, from RIA-Novosti quoting a defense official, says that they will be sent to Belarus after being restored to combat-ready status.
        A previous report from October, 2003 seems to favor the systems’ operable status, which cited Ivanov stressing of the reported deal that “What is important is that these systems will be in service use, and they will guard the airspace of the Union State.” The S-300 was then described as “the calling card of Russian air defense,” as well as defense against ballistic and cruise missiles, with an intercepting range of 7-100km, a height of 25-30km, and a flying speed of 300 meters per second.  (Article, Link) 

» Oct. 23, 2003: Belarus asks Russia for S-300s; transfer likely

» More stories on: Russia, Russian Missile Defenses

» Missile system details for: S-300P (SA-10 Grumble), S-300V (SA-12A Gladiator, SA-12B Giant)

After 43 Years, Russian Missile Defenses Still Ready for Anything

A statement released by the press service of the Russian Space Troops reports that “The missile defence system of the Space Troops is always combat-ready and capable of fulfilling any mission,” according to a news item from the Russian Interfax military news agency. The statement comes on the forty-third anniversary of the first test launch and successful intercept by a Russian missile interceptor, the V-1000 (later known as the SA-5, or Griffon), in 1961:

In addition to the interceptor missiles currently deployed, the missile defence system also comprises reconnaissance means (Dunay 3U and Don 2N radars) for target detection, tracking and guidance; command posts, missile silos and an all-encompassing data grid. The press service said that the Russian missile defence system can perform automatically and by signals from the early warning missile strike system. It automatically distinguishes between warheads and other (false) targets, jamming and interference.

         Also quite interesting is the claim by the Space Troops’ press service that “Russian designers are at least 25 years ahead of their American counterparts.”  (More »»») 

» Russia to send old S-300 air/missile defenses to Belarus

» Mar. 3, 2001: Pravda: 40th anniv. of Soviet BMD test

» More stories on: Russia, Russian Missile Defenses

Taiwan to Purchase and Deploy Six Patriot Batteries by 2019—But Are They Enough?

Previous reports indicated that Taiwan would proceed with the purchase of three batteries of PAC-3 Patriot missile interceptors, but a news item by the Taiwan News now suggests that that number will increase, to six batteries, consisting of four launchers, which in turn each have 16 interceptor missiles. The plan is said to involve the deployment of the said batteries within 15 years, that is, by 2019.
        The larger purchase would not, however, represent a complete defense of Taiwan against the considerable and growing Chinese threat. Even the larger purchase would mean only an additional 240 interceptors. Such a defense pales in comparison to the over 500 short range ballistic missiles China already has deployed near the coast of Taiwan, a number which increases at a rate of 75 to 100 per year. Currently, Taiwan is believed to have some 32 of the less advanced PAC-2 interceptors, spread between two batteries. Supposing China’s rate of increase was to hold steady at 75 per year, then by the time the six new batteries of PAC-3 are deployed by 2019, China could have 1,625 SRBMs with which to threaten their island neighbor. Against these, Taiwan could have only 416.
        Although the 2019 deadline is somewhat late, a defense which consists of Aegis sea-based defenses as well, with additional interceptors there, would help narrow the gap. (Article, Link) 

» Feb. 19, 2004: Despite Chinese bullying, Taiwan to proceed with Patriot BMD

» Jul. 24, 2003: Taiwan requests 3 batteries of PAC-3

» Mar. 3, 2004: Sale of Aegis to Taiwan approved

» More stories on: China, Policy, Taiwan

» Missile system details for: Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3)

Army Issues $505 Million in Contracts for New PAC-3 Missiles, Equipment

Lockheed Martin has been given $505 million in contracts by the Army for the production of 159 Patriot Advanced Capability-3 hit-to-kill missiles along with performance enhancements for the Patriot air and missile defense system, according to Inside Missile Defense. Lockheed noted that 22 of the 159 missiles will replace those PAC-3s used up during Operation Iraqi Freedom. The Army is looking to provide these PAC-3 missile enhancements so they can be fully integrated into the Patriot system.
        A key upgrade is the incorporation of a stronger motor and larger fins that could boost the range of the missile by 50 percent and improve maneuverability against ballistic and cruise missiles, respectively. (Link) 

» Missile system details for: Patriot Advanced Capability-3 (PAC-3)

THAAD Renamed

The Theatre High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense program has apparently been renamed, but its acronym will remain the same. The “T” in THAAD will now stand for now “Terminal,” referring to the last phase in a ballistic missile’s flight in which the interceptor destroys it. The Honolulu Advertiser cites a February 26 MDA release that the change better reflects its role in the nation’s Ballistic Missile Defense System.
        A more complete explanation, however, may indicate that the change is more than bureaucratic: specifically, a belated updating of new policy language indicated by the December 16, 2002 National Security Policy Directive 23 of President Bush, which repudiated the artificial distinction between “theatre” and “national” missile defense. The reason THAAD was renamed, in other words, is because the term “theatre missile defense” is obsolete, made so by the 2002 withdrawal from the ABM Treaty.
        The terms “theatre” and “national” which came into use due to constraints imposed by the ABM Treaty of 1972, and became important when accords were signed in the 1990s which permitted the development of “theatre” systems capable of intercepting short-range missiles, and “national” defenses capable of intercepting long-range ICBMs. By only permitting theatre defenses, the sacrosanct doctrine of mutually assured destruction (MAD) with the former Soviet Union was left intact.
        Although the distinction between theatre (short-range) and national (long range) missile defenses is obsolete, this does not mean that reliance upon a policy of mutually assured destruction (MAD) has similarly gone by the wayside. The revised deployment will have its own revised vocabulary designed to articulate the application of MAD to changed circumstances. The “limited” ground based missile defense system to be deployed this year in Alaska is designed to intercept long range missiles, but it will have too few interceptors to intercept more than a handful. For the immediate future, the dangerous policy of MAD will apparently remain intact vis a vis those countries—currently, Russia and China—capable of producing enough ICBMs to overwhelm such “limited” defenses.
        Update: The March 3 edition of Inside Missile Defense notes that the tests this year will be the first in four years, and represent a substantially improved system. This, then, could be another impetus for a name change.  (More »»») 

» Text of NSPD 23

» Dec. 17 White House Fact Sheet similar to NSPD-23

» Feb. 26 Memo from MDA THAAD office

» More stories on: Land-Based Systems, Policy, Testing - American

» Missile system details for: Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD)

Russia to Repeat Failed Missile Tests

The Itar-Tass news agency reports that Russian President Putin has ordered his defense chief to redo the three failed missile tests during the massive and highly publicized February nuclear war exercise. “I task you to prepare as soon as possible new exercises, perhaps on a smaller scale, so I could make sure that all mistakes have been fixed,” Putin is quoted as saying at a meeting of top military officials.
        On February 17, two SLBMs failed to launch properly from the Novomoskovsk submarine in the Barents Sea, and the following day another missile engaged its self-destruct mechanism after it diverted from its set course.
        It was not clarified if these re-tests would be in addition to the ten tests already said to be planned for 2004. (Article, Link) 

» Itar Tass account of order to redo tests

» Mar. 2, 2004: Itar Tass: Investigation results due in April

» More stories on: Russia, Testing - Foreign