|
|
|
 |
|
|
| HOME |
| NUCLEAR AND WMD |
| TRANS-ATLANTIC SECURITY |
| WEAPONS TRADE |
| BASIC PUBLICATIONS |
| ABOUT BASIC |
 |
MISSILE DEFENCE UPDATE29 May 2007 In this issue:
Past editions of Missile Defence Update are available at: http://www.basicint.org/update/mdu.htm. EditorialAfter a 12 month hiatus Missile Defence Update is back on your screens as a regular bi-monthly publication. Since we have been away the development of missile defences has accelerated with a number of disturbing new twists. This new and improved bi-monthly update will provide a news review of the most critical challenges facing missile proliferation, of which missile defences are an integral part, and point the reader to additional resources. To see BASIC's other email updates, visit http://www.basicint.org/update. Past editions of Missile Defence Update are available at: http://www.basicint.org/update/mdu.htm. The Bush administration continues to drive the missile defence agenda, but at the beginning of this month, in a major snub to the President, the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee cut the funding request for national missile defence. This unnecessary, destabilising and expensive programme does little to improve the security of the United States, and with the administration pushing to begin digging silos for 10 interceptors in Poland and laying the foundation for a tracking radar in the Czech Republic, it is also re-opening Cold War divisions within Europe. The bill, still under consideration, would cut $160 million from funds proposed for construction in Poland (while leaving funds to move forward with installing the radar for the Czech Republic), as part of $764 million in cuts from the $8.9 billion the administration has sought for the Pentagon's Missile Defence Agency (MDA) in 2008. Similar discussions are under way in the Senate. While these proposed cuts in funding are a good start, they don't go nearly deep enough. Congress needs to end funding for this latter-day 'Maginot Line in the sky', which has very low probability of functioning effectively, even lower relevance to contemporary security risks, and is provoking long-term missile escalation with Russia and China. Meanwhile NATO troops in Afghanistan experience overstretch, and responses to other security challenges like climate change remain under-funded.
United StatesMissile defence architecture in Eastern EuropeIn January, the US administration announced that it had begun negotiations to have ten long-range missile interceptors sited in Poland and a radar station situated in the Czech Republic. While Polish and Czech officials have indicated that they are likely to agree to the US request, recent opinion surveys suggest that 57% of Poles and 60% of Czechs are opposed to the plans. A 38-member team from the US. Missile Defense Agency (MDA) took hydrological and geological measurements and examined infrastructure at the Czech site in mid May, and the first round of talks between Czech and US officials also took place at the same time. Formal talks between Polish and US officials have also commenced. The plan has also angered the Russia government, which sees the proposed deployment as provocative. Kremlin officials have said the US plan "threatens the worlds strategic stability" and that they are preparing a suitable response. They have already threatened to withdraw from the INF Treaty, suspended and threatened to end their adherence to the CFE Treaty, and warned that they might target the new sites with sub-strategic nuclear weapons. RIA Novosti reported on May 08 that Russia's strategic missile forces will equip the Topol-M missile system with multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRV) in the next two or three years to help penetrate missile defences more effectively. There is also a danger that placing missile interceptors in Eastern Europe may push Russia into increasing the number of missiles on alert (for fear of a US first strike and ability to knock out any remaining missiles they succeed in launching). Such moves would seriously damage disarmament efforts agreed under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the Moscow Treaty (SORT). On going discussions between NATO and Russian officials, including the offer of incentives such as co-operation on future missile developments, have so far failed to narrow the gap in thinking between the two sides. The US administration claims that the interceptors are aimed against possible attacks from 'Rogue States' in the Middle East (Iran and Syria) and that the system is purely defensive, with neither the intention nor the ability to intercept Russian ballistic missiles. However, critics of the plan such as Radek Sikorski, a Polish senator and former defence minister, argue that the missile interceptors could in the longer run undermine Russian deterrence and pose a threat to Polish-Russian relations. With no acceptable compromises or concessions being made by either side, the plans have prompted some analysts to talk about the possibility of a new Cold War. There have also been proposals to locate the missiles in the UK, the Netherlands or Georgia. Tony Blair has been actively lobbying for the UK to be used as a site for interceptors, believing that "it is an important step towards providing missile defence coverage for Europe". But the Americans' clear preference is for an Eastern European site. In June, President Bush is set to visit Poland and the Czech Republic is a bid to win over a sceptical public in both countries. Chinese officials have expressed concern that the system will spark an arms race, fearing missile defences could render the Chinese nuclear deterrent obsolete. The issue is further complicated by the dispute over Taiwan and the possibility of deployment there. Further reading: Blair pressing to host American 'Star Wars' Interceptor Missiles, and keeping Parliament in the Dark (again), BASIC Press Release, 23 February 2007 'A New Arms Race? We're in the Middle of it', Harald Müller (pp87-89) and 'How Dangerous are Arms Races?', Joachim Krause (pp90-92), International Politik, Summer Issue 2, 2007. "A Defense We Just Don't Need (Yet)", Michael O'Hanlon,
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/17/opinion/17ohanlon.html? "America has turned the missile defence debate into a divisive
issue by failing to address Europe's political concerns" by F
Stephen Larrabee and Andrzej Karkosza "Barroso: Russia should not have veto over missile defense shield" http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/04/29/america/NA-GEN-US-EU-Russia.php "Greece raises questions over missile defense", http://en.rian.ru/world/20070427/64568868.html "OSCE an appropriate forum for missile defence discussions, says
Organization's Chairman" "Russia can defeat any missile defense system" - chief of staff, http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/politics/28.html?menu=1&id_issue=11720074 "Interaction with U.S. in missile defense must begin with threat evaluation" says Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, http://www.interfax.ru/e/B/politics/28.html?id_issue=11719975 Czech president talks missile defence with Bush before Putin
meet
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/europe/news/ Rice dismisses Russian concerns over missile defense bases, http://www.startribune.com/587/story/1146036.html "Czech decision to host U.S. missile defense cannot be revised" says Czech President, Vaclav Klaus, http://www.interfax.com/17/265159/Interview.aspx How not to promote American missile defense in Europe, F.
Stephen Larrabee and Andrzej Karkoszka,
http://www.dailystar.com.lb/article.asp? Testing the GMD missile defence systemThe flight test of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) missile defense system on 1 September 2006 marked the first test intercept for the programme in nearly four years, and was the first intercept by an operationally configured warhead. Flight Test 2 (FT-2) involved an interceptor launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base (California) hitting a target coming out of Kodiak (Alaska). This intercept was the sixth for the overall programme out of 11 attempts. No countermeasures were used during the test. Victoria Samson at the Center for Defense Information, described testing without countermeasures as "not realistic" and leaving "gaping holes in the GMD infrastructure that cannot be filled for some time to come" (Defense News, 16 October),. The missing pieces from the FT-2 test included the Sea-based X-band Radar, required to help track targets during flight, which was stuck in Hawaii undergoing repairs, and the two satellite networks needed to support GMD. The Space Tracking and Surveillance System and the Space-based Infrared System High, which respectively would detect and track enemy missiles and allow for early detection of enemy missile launches, are years behind schedule and billions of dollars over budget. A follow-up test (FT-3) was expected in December last year but was delayed by software problems for five months. It was again delayed on May 24 because of bad weather and re-scheduled for the following day. But on May 25 the MDA confirmed in a press release that the test was not completed and designated it a "no test" when the target, launched from the Kodiak Launch Complex, in Alaska, failed to reach the defended area, and the Ground-Based Interceptor, which would have come from the Ronald W. Reagan Missile Defense Site, located at Vandenberg Air Force Base, Calif. was not launched. Further reading: "U.S. to test missile defense system at a decisive moment", IHT, May 22, http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/22/america/shield.php Funding for MD in 2008The defence authorization bill for 2008 contains more than $9 billion for ballistic missile defence programmes, including additional ground-based interceptors in the United States or Europe, the Airborne Laser (ABL) programme, the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) programme, and the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI). The United States has already deployed more than a dozen GMD interceptors in Alaska and California. Despite the fact that the interceptors have not been tested against realistic countermeasures, and there is currently no plan to do so, the Bush administration proposes to spend $170 million to deploy more of these interceptors in Alaska and also proposes to deploy a completely untested variant of these interceptors in Poland, along with a tracking radar system in the Czech Republic (see above). Although the House Armed Services Committee cut $160 million of the $310 million requested for the European site, subsequent amendments in the complicated appropriations process may overturn the committee's recommendation or cut the rest of the money. The Administration has asked for over $500 million for the ABL programme, an ill-fated effort to place a laser capable of shooting down missiles in a Boeing 747 airplane. The ABL continues to have technical problems and the House Armed Services Committee cut the programme to $300 million, although again, amendments both to further cut ABL funds and to restore full funding may be offered. The Administration has requested $228 million and $271 million for the KIE and MKV programmes respectively. KEI was initially promoted as a system designed to attack incoming enemy missiles shortly after they launched (during the boost phase), but now it is being promoted simply as a faster version of the current GMD system. Since this is vulnerable to decoys, the MKV program attempts to solve the problem by developing small kill vehicles and placing multiple "kill vehicles" on each interceptor. They are also being considered for use as space-based interceptors. Further reading on US missile defence: 'US puts trust in Alaska missile shield': "The critical paradox
is this: the US has to knock down every missile but their enemies
only have to penetrate the shield just once." "The Missile Defense Agency: Unsupervised and Over Budget" , Sam
Black, Victoria Samson 'Mr Bush: Tear down these walls', A general synopsis of US foreign policy including the missile shield http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2007/04/26/765/ The Next Steps for Missile Defense, by Baker Spring, http://www.heritage.org/Research/NationalSecurity/bg2028.cfm Joint MD programmes with IsraelAn amendment to the 2008 funding bill proposed by Republican
presidential contender Duncan Hunter (R-Calif.) would redirect $205
million in MD funds to joint programmes with Israel, including
Arrow missile co-production and integration ($25 million), a joint
short-range missile system ($45 million) and the purchase of a
Terminal High Altitude Area Defence (THAAD) fire unit for Israel
($135 million). The amendment was passed in the House 394 to 30.
Co-sponsor, Rep. Mark Kirk (Ill.) cited the prevention of a
potential second Holocaust in its support. See Aerospace Daily
& Defense Report,
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp? Space policyA new National Space Policy signed by President George Bush in October last year asserts that the United States has the right to conduct whatever research, development and "other activities" in space that it deems necessary for its own national interests. The new policy further warns that the US will take those actions necessary to protect its space capabilities "and deny, if necessary, adversaries the use of space capabilities hostile" to those interests. The document adds: "Space activities have improved life in the United States and around the world, enhancing security, protecting lives and the environment, speeding information flow serving as an engine for economic growth and revolutionising the way people view their world and the cosmos." "Freedom of action in space is as important to the United States as air power and sea power", the policy assets in the introduction. In those portions of the new policy document that have been made public- the first full revision of overall US space policy in 10 years-there is no specific mention of the weaponisation of space. It says the US' priorities are to "strengthen the nation's space leadership" and to enable "unhindered US operations in and through space to defend our interests there". But the policy also claims that national security is "critically" dependent upon space capabilities. As a result it calls on the Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, and the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, to "develop and deploy space capabilities that sustain US advantage and support defence and intelligence transformations". The deployment of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction are prohibited by the 1967 United Nations Outer Space Treaty. In October 2005 the US voted against a UN resolution calling for the banning of weapons in space and has repeatedly resisted efforts to hold negotiations on the issue at the Geneva-based Conference on Disarmament. Theresa Hitchens, director of the Center for Defense Information in Washington, said that the new policy "kicks the door a little more open to a space-war fighting strategy" and has a "very unilateral tone to it." The Missile Defense Agency is expected to start space-based interceptor test bed experiments in 2008. The test bed experiments would investigate "distributing sensing and command and control," an area that is important because of the technical challenges involved in building a space-based defence. Funding for this is included in the agency's future years defence plan, beginning in FY 08. Former UN weapons chief and chair of the Sweden-based Weapons of
Mass Destruction Commission, Hans Blix, has advocated a 40th
anniversary review of the Outer Space Treaty, which entered into
force in 1967 (see International Herald Tribune, (9 May),
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/05/09/ Further reading: Preserving Freedom of Action in Space: Realizing the Potential and Limits of U.S. Space Power, Michael Krepon, Theresa Hitchens, and Michael Katz-Hyman, Henry L. Stimson Center, May 2007 Andrew Buncombe, 'Space: America's New War Zone', The Independent 19 October 2006, http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/article1902195.ece); and Marc Kaufman, 'Bush Sets Defense As Space Priority', Washington Post, 18 October 2006; Michael Krepon and Michael Katz Hyman, .The Responsibilities of Space Faring Nations', The Henry L. Stimson Center, October 2006, http://www.stimson.org/pub.cfm?id=340 "Missile Defense, the Space Relationship, & the Twenty-First Century: 2007 Report" Independent Working Group (Cambridge, Mass.: Institute for Foreign Policy Analysis, 2006) http://www.ifpa.org/pdf/IWGreport.pdf "What If Space Were Weaponized? Possible Consequences for Crisis Scenarios," Jeffrey Lewis, Center for Defense Information, http://www.cdi.org/PDFs/scenarios.pdf Missile proliferationAdvocates of missile defence in the United States and Europe often say that the threat from ballistic missiles is growing. Yet by most measures, the threat has steadily declined over the past 20 years. There are far fewer missiles in the world today than there were 20 years ago, fewer states with missile programmes, and fewer hostile missiles aimed at the United States. Further reading: Joe Cirincione and Andrew Wade, "Get Smart on Ballistic
Missiles," CAP Analysis, May 8, 2007
http://capweb.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?key=268236757& Jürgen Scheffran, 'Missiles in conflict: the issue of missiles in all its complexity', Disarmament Forum - Missile Control?, Issue One 2007, UNIDIR, United Nations. NATO's missile defence postureGermany has declared that any missile defence system located in Europe should be under NATO control, though it seems highly unlikely that the United States will agree to this. NATO is currently developing a theatre missile defence system to protect its armed forces against short and medium range missiles. The Alliance is currently in talks with Russia to conduct joint theatre missile defence operations during crisis response missions. It is also looking at a more expansive missile defence system to protect population centres in member states, although concerns persist as to the lack of transparency in this process. Further reading: 'What are NATO's next steps on missile defence?', Security and Defence Agenda Roundtable Report, 19 March 2007, Brussels. 'On the other side of defence' - The cohesive group of people
devoted to missile defence display cult-like characteristics that
should be exposed to a wider audience, Ian Davis, Comment is
Free, The Guardian, 27 February 2007,
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/ian_davis/ BASIC Calls for Declassification of NATO's Missile Defence Study, BASIC Media Advisory, 31 May 2006. Prompt Global StrikeThe US Navy has been seeking to convert Trident II D-5 SLBMs to carry conventional warheads. Although Congress eliminated the $127 million earmarked in the fiscal year 2007 budget for this purpose, the US Air Force now is pushing for a so-called Conventional Strike Missile (CSM) that would be based on land and follow a different flight path than intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). Marine Corps Gen. James Cartwright, head of US Strategic Command, has maintained his call for PGS solutions on Capitol Hill, including via testimony in March to the House Armed Services Committee. Further reading: "Conventional Strike Missile Pushed by Air Force", Apr 26, 2007,
Michael Bruno/Aerospace Daily & Defense Report,
http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp? "Conventional Warheads for Long-Range Ballistic Missiles:
Background and Issues for Congress", CRS Report, February 9,
2007. Missile defences in Asia - fuelling a regional arms race?In January, China destroyed one of its own weather satellites using a ballistic missile to test its anti-satellite capabilities. The test was condemned by many, who accused China of pushing the race to militarise space. Washington looks set to overturn an export ban on the world's most advanced fighter aircraft, the F-22A Raptor, a fifth generation stealth fighter with the capability to track and destroy small cruise missiles in flight, by supplying Japan. This could have serious implications for the strategic balance in northeast Asia, in giving Japan clear air superiority over China. The US military have announced their intent to build a ballistic missile defence system on the US Territory of Guam, within striking distance of China, and to relocate 8,000 marines from Japan to the island. India has again tested the BrahMos cruise missile, jointly developed with Russia. The Indian Navy has already deployed the missile, and the Army will do shortly. In April Taiwan's military declared for the first time it would launch missile strikes against China in the event of an attack. Next week, Taiwan will conduct a series of live-fire military routines aimed at demonstrating how the island's armed forces would respond to an attack from China. Further reading: The Newest Anti-Satellite Contender: China's ASAT Test, David Isenberg, BASIC Notes, 16 March 2007. China's China's Space Odyssey: What the Antisatellite Test
Reveals About Decision-Making in Beijing
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20070501facomments86301/ Book review: War in Heaven - The Arms Race in Outer Space by Helen Caldicott and Craig Eisendrath, The New Press 2007Helen Caldicott is president of the Washington-based Nuclear Policy Research Institute. She was a founder of the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the organisation that won the 1985 Nobel Peace Prize. Craig Eisendrath is the chair of the Project for Nuclear Awareness and co-founder of the National Constitution Center. Their book is a 'must-read' account of the serious moves under way to weaponise space. It starts with a brief history of outer space and then looks at its potential for peaceful use. Developments in missile defences are examined as a "prelude to space-based weapons", and this is a followed by a chapter on current plans for "weaponizing the heavens". The final chapter begins with this exhortation: "Now is the time to stop weapons in space. Not ten years from now, or even five or two, when major contracts have been awarded, but now before the momentum builds and there is no turning back". The book sets out the case for "rules of the road for international conduct in outer space", governing debris, radio spectrum and orbital slots, ballistic missile proliferation, satellite registration, and mechanisms for lowering tension. A world treaty banning space-based weapons is articulated as the ultimate goal. This perceptive survey of space policies outlines the planetary bargains that would guarantee secure access to space for peaceful purposes for all nations and keep our shared heavens in good working order. And finally.....The Pinocchio Award for Services to Missile Defence"More than 20 nations have ballistic missiles today. That
number is growing everyday. That's something we're worried
about." So Steve, by your calculation, every nation in the world will have ballistic missiles by the end of the year. No wonder you are worried. In fact, the overall number of missile-owning 'states of concern' declined from 11 in the mid 1980s to six in 2005. (Source: www.carnegieendowment.org/files/DecliningBallisticMissileThreat2005-2.pdf) Click here for a Printer-Friendly Version. |
||
|
BASIC
UK: The Grayston Centre, 2nd Floor, 28 Charles Square London
N1 6HT, +44-(0)20-7324 4680 |