MissileThreat.com

Numerous government and academic assessments have been conducted on missile defense, the threat posed by proliferating ballistic missiles, and related subjects. This section contains the best reports and analyses from both advocates and opponents of missile defense.

Outline of Resources:

Government Documents

• Threat Analysis
• Budget and Acquisition
• Development and Production
• Missile Defense Agency Fact Sheets

Non-Government Articles and Reports

• History of Missile Development
• Threat Analysis
• Missile Defense Debate

Government Documents

Threat Analysis

• United Kingdom. Iraq’s Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Assessment of the British Government. November, 2002 ::

Libya

• Congressional Research Service. Libya. 

February 24, 2003 ::

Russia

• Central Intelligence Agency. Annual Report to Congress on the Safety and Security of Russian Nuclear Facilities and Military Forces. 

February, 2002 ::

• Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. Proliferation and the Former Soviet Union. 

September, 1994 ::

• Defense Intelligence Agency. Soviet Military Space Doctrine. 

August 1, 1984 ::

• Defense Intelligence Agency. Controlled Offensive Behavior, USSR. 

July, 1972 ::

• Central Intelligence Agency. Declassified Documents on the Cuban Missile Crisis. 

January, 1962 ::

General

• Congressional Research Service. Nuclear Nonproliferation Issues.
  April 9, 2005 ::
  

• Congressional Research Service. Arms Control and Nonproliferation Activities: A Catalog of Recent Events.

January 7, 2005 ::

• National Intelligence Council, 2020 Project. Mapping the Global Future.

December, 2004 ::

• Congressional Research Service. Nonstrategic Nuclear Weapons.

  September, 2004 ::

• Congressional Research Service. Conventional Arms Transfers to Developing Nations, 1996-2003.

  August 26, 2004 ::

• Congressional Research Service. High Altitude Electromagnetic Pulse (HEMP) and High Power Microwave (HPM) Devices: Threat Assessments.

  August 20, 2004 ::

• Congressional Research Service. Missile Survey: Ballistic and Cruise Missiles of Foreign Countries.

  March 5, 2004 ::

• Report of the Commission to Assess the Threat to the United States from Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack.

  January, 2004 ::

• Central Intelligence Agency. Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced Conventional Munitions, 1 July Through 31 December 2003.

  December, 2003 ::

• National Air and Space Intelligence Center. Ballistic and Cruise Missile Threat.

  August, 2003 ::

• Congressional Research Service. Nuclear, Biological, Chemical, and Missile Proliferation Sanctions: Selected Current Law.

  January 23, 2003 ::

• Congress. Senate and House of Representatives. Joint Inquiry Into Intelligence Community Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 11, 2001.

  December, 2002 ::

• Congress. Senate Armed Services Committee. Worldwide Threat: Converging Dangers in a Post 9/11 World. Testimony of Director of Central Intelligence George J. Tenet.

  March 19, 2002 ::

• Central Intelligence Agency. Unclassified Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technology Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advanced Conventional Munitions, 1 July Through 31 December 2001.

  December 31, 2001 ::

• National Intelligence Council. Foreign Missile Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat Through 2015.

  August, 2001 ::

• Executive Summary of the Report of the Commission To Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States (Rumsfeld Commission).

  July 15, 1998 ::

• Introducing the Report of the Commission to Access the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States.

  July 15, 1998 ::

• Congress. Senate. Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation, and Federal Services. The Proliferation Primer.

  January, 1998 ::

• Central Intelligence Agency. National Intelligence Estimate 95-19. Emerging Missile Threats to North America During the Next 15 Years.

  November, 1995 ::

• Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. Technologies Underlying Weapons of Mass Destruction.

  December, 1993 ::

Strategy and Doctrine

• Army War College. Guide to National Security Policy and Strategy.

  July, 2004 ::

• Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. Strategic Plan.

  February, 2003 ::

• National Security Policy Directive 23 on Missile Defense.

  December 16, 2002 ::

  NSPD 23 was issued by President on December 16, 2002, released on May 20, 2003. The directive was pursuant to the deployment of a limited missile defense system by 2004.

• National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction.

  December, 2002 ::

• Department of Defense. Memorandum on Missile Defense Program Direction.

  January 2, 2002 ::

• Office of Homeland Security. National Strategy for Homeland Security.

  January, 2002 ::

• Congress. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The Administration’s Missile Defense Program and the ABM Treaty.

  July 24, 2001 ::

• Report of the Commission to Assess United States National Security Space Management and Organization (Rumsfeld Commission).

  January 11, 2001 ::

• Congress. Senate. Stubborn Things: A Decade of Facts about Ballistic Missile Defense. A Report by Senator Thad Cochran.

  September, 2000 ::

• Joint Doctrine for Countering Air and Missile Threats.

  October 19, 1999 ::

• Congress. Senate Foreign Relations Committee. Ballistic Missiles: Threat and Response (Douglas Feith testimony)

  May 25, 1999 ::

• Department of Defense. Report to Congress on Theater Missile Defense Architecture Options for the Asia-Pacific Region.

  May 4, 1999 ::

• George Miron and Douglas J. Feith. Memorandum of Law.

  January 22, 1999 ::

Budget and Acquisition

• Missile Defense Agency. Historical Funding for MDA FY85-05.

  January, 2005 ::

• Department of Defense. Program Budget Decision 753.

  December, 2004 ::

• Missile Defense Agency. FY2005 Budget Estimates Overview.

  February 18, 2004 ::

• Missile Defense Agency. Ballistic Missile Defense Fiscal Year, 2004 Budget.

  April, 2003 ::

• Department of Defense. Program Acquisition Costs by Weapon System, FY 2003.

  February, 2002 ::

Development and Production

• Congressional Research Service. Cruise Missile Defense.

  August 27, 2004 ::

• Congressional Budget Office. Alternatives for Boost-Phase Missile Defense.

  July, 2004 ::

• General Accounting Office. Missile Defense: Actions Are Needed to Enhance Testing and Accountability.

  April, 2004 ::

• General Accounting Office. Missile Defense: Actions Being Taken to Address Testing Recommendations, but Updated Assessment Needed.

  February, 2004 ::

• Congressional Research Service. Nuclear Weapon Initiatives: Low-Yield R&D, Advanced Concepts, Earth Penetrators, Test Readiness.

  December 11, 2003 ::

• General Accounting Office. Missile Defense: Additional Knowledge Needed in Developing System for Intercepting Long-Range Missiles.

  August, 2003 ::

• General Accounting Office. Missile Defense: Knowledge-Based Practices Are Being Adopted, but Risks Remain.

  April, 2003 ::

• General Accounting Office. Missile Defense: Review of Results and Limitations of an Early National Missile Defense Flight Test.

  February, 2002 ::

• National Missile Defense Independent Review Team (Welch Panel). Executive Summary.

  June 13, 2000 ::

• Report of the National Missile Defense Review Committee (Welch Report).

  November, 1999 ::

• Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. Summary of Report to Congress on Utility of Sea-Based Assets to National Missile Defense.

  June, 1999 ::

• Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) Media Update.

  July 9, 1998 ::

• Report of the Panel on Reducing Risk in Ballistic Missile Defense Flight Test Programs (Welch Report).

  February 28, 1998 ::

• Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. Ballistic Missile Defense Glossary, Version 3.0.

  June, 1997 ::

• Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. 1997 Report to the Congress on Ballistic Missile Defense.

  January, 1997 ::

• BMD Panel of the Army Science Board. Midcourse Discrimination for the Phase One Strategic Defense System.

  February, 1989 ::

• Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. SDI: Technology, Survivability, and Software.

  May, 1988 ::

• Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. Ballistic Missile Defense Technologies.

  September, 1985 ::

• Congress. Office of Technology Assessment. Directed Energy Missile Defense in Space.

  April, 1984 ::

Missile Defense Agency Fact Sheets

Advanced Systems

Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense

Block 2004 Development

Block 2006 Development

Ballistic Missile Defense Challenge

Ballistic Missile Defense System Interceptors

The Ballistic Missile Defense System

A Historical Beginning

Command, Control, Battle Management, and Communications

Forward Deployable Radars

Ground-Based Midcourse

Airborne Laser

Missiles of the World

Patriot Advanced Capability-3/Medium Extended Air Defense System

Sea Based X-Band Radar

Space Tracking and Surveillance System

Systems Engineering and Integration

Targets and Countermeasures

Test and Assessment

Terminal High Altitude Area Defense

Non-Government Articles, Papers, Reports

History of Missile Development

• Henry D. Sokolski, ed. Getting Mad: Nuclear Mutual Assured Destruction, Its Origins and Practice. Nonproliferation Policy Education Center.

  November, 2004 ::

• Gregory H. Canavan. Missile Defense for the 21st Century. The Heritage Foundation.

  January, 2003 ::

• Center for Defense Information. Arms Control Chronology.

  January, 2002 ::

• National Institute for Public Policy. Some Ballistic Missile Developments Since the Rumsfeld Commission Report.

  January, 2002 ::

• The Center for Nonproliferation Studies. A History of Ballistic Missile Development in the DPRK.

  January, 1999 ::

Threat Analysis

• United Nations Security Council. Seventeenth Quarterly Report on the Activities of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission Submitted in Accordance with Paragraph 12 of Security Council Resolution 1284 (1999).

  May 28, 2004 ::

• Center for Strategic and International Studies. Proliferation in Iran: An Overview of Delivery Systems and Possible CBRN Weapons Programs.

  February, 2004 ::

• Gunnar Arbman and Charles Thornton. Russia’s Tactical Nuclear Weapons Part I: Background and Policy Issues. Swedish Defense Research Agency.

  November, 2003 ::

• Brad Roberts. China and Ballistic Missile Defense: 1955 to 2002 and Beyond. Institute for Defense Analyses.

  September, 2003 ::

• The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. WMD Challenges on the Korean Peninsula: A Trilateral Dialogue Report.

  June 9, 2003 ::

• Ivan Eland. The China-Taiwan Military Balance Implications for the United States. The Cato Institute.

  February 3, 2003 ::

• Steven Lambakis, James Kiras, and Kristin Kolet. Understanding “Asymmetric” Threats to the United States. National Institute for Public Policy.

  October, 2002 ::

• The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. Security Issues in the Middle East.

  June 1, 2002 ::

• National Institute for Public Policy. Evolving Russian Perspectives on Missile Defense: The Emerging Accommodation.

  March, 2002 ::

• The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. Nuclear Missile Attack on Detroit, Michigan.

  January, 2002 ::

• Andrew C. Winner and Toshi Yoshihara. Nuclear Stability in South Asia. The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis.

  January, 2002 ::

• David Tanks. Assessing the Cruise Missile Puzzle: How Great a Defense Challenge? The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis.

  October, 2000 ::

• Stephen Cambone. “An Inherent Lesson in Arms Control.” The Washington Quarterly.

  January, 2000 ::

• Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui. Unrestricted Warfare. Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House.

  February, 1999 ::

• 2007 Report of the Independent Working Group: Missile Defense, The Space Relationship, and the Twenty-First Century

Missile Defense Debate

• Gregory H. Canavan. Estimates of Performance and Cost for Boost Phase Intercept. The Washington Roundtable on Science and Public Policy, The George C. Marshall Institute.

  September, 2004 ::

• Jeff Kueter. Missile Defense: A Continuing National Priority. The George C. Marshall Institute.

  May, 2004 ::

• Union of Concerned Scientists. Technical Realities: An Analysis of the 2004 Deployment of a U.S. National Missile Defense System.

  May, 2004 ::

• American Physical Society Study Group. Boost-Phase Intercept Systems for National Missile Defense Scientific and Technical Issues.

  July, 2003 ::

• The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. Missile Defense and Counter-Proliferation on the Korean Peninsula: Exploring US-ROK Responses and Options.

  January, 2003 ::

• The Heritage Foundation. Defending the American Homeland. A Report of The Heritage Foundation Homeland Security Task Force Chaired by L. Paul Bremer III and Edwin Meese III.

  January, 2002 ::

• Council for a Livable World Education Fund. Briefing Book on Ballistic Missile Defense.

  September, 2001 ::

• Center for Defense Information. National Missile Defense: What Does It All Mean?

  September, 2000 ::

• Stephen W. Young. Pushing the Limits: The Decision on National Missile Defense. Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers/Council for a Livable World Education Fund.

  July, 2000 ::

• The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. National Missile Defense: Policy Issues and Technological Capabilities.

  July, 2000 ::

• IFPA-Fletcher Conference 2000 Final Report. National Strategies and Capabilities for a Changing World.

  January, 2000 ::

• The Heritage Foundation. The Ballistic Missile Handbook.

  January, 2000 ::

• Charles V. Peña and Barbara Conry. National Missile Defense: Examining the Options. The Cato Institute.
  March 16, 1999 ::
  
• The Heritage Foundation. Defending America: A Plan to Meet the Urgent Missile Threat.
  March, 1999 ::
  The Heritage Foundation convened a study team to examine the growing threat of ballistic missiles armed with weapons of mass destruction—nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.
  
  
• The Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis. Exploring U.S. Missile Defense Requirements in 2010: What Are the Policy and Technology Challenges?
  April, 1997 ::