A Case for Better Missile Defense
Why a Murky Debate Leaves the Way Forward Anything but Clear
Eliot Adams
Last Updated: 12/29/09 Section: Features
On September 17th President Obama announced the cancelation of the European component of the Bush-era missile defense program and declared the implementation of a new system comprising of a mixture of sea and land based systems.
According to secretary of Defense Robert Gates, this new system can be deployed sooner, is less expensive, more adaptable, and focuses on countering Iran's current threat: the US, he says, is not abandoning its allies. Obama insists he remains determined to implement a missile defense system. I interviewed Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, a prominent conservative think tank, who shared with me the central conservative criticisms of the plan's cancellation. Kennedy is also a member of the Independent Working Group (IWG) on missile defense. Kennedy seemed skeptical of Obama and Gates' intentions, and fears that Obama will never deploy an effective missile defense system.
The cancelled missile defense plan was developed in 2006 and consisted of ten interceptor missiles stationed in Poland with complimentary sensors in the Czech Republic and other sensors in an undetermined central European nation. Initially, the system was estimated to be in place by 2015, but prolonged negotiation and political maneuvering with the Czech Republic and Poland delayed the plan by two years. The original system was designed to defend Europe from approximately five long range missiles from the Middle East, but on Obama's directive was cancelled to make way for a new defense strategy. A related 2006 plan to defend against North Korean missiles, however, is still underway; these interceptors will be placed in Alaska and California, as the original 2006 plan under George Bush dictated.
The new European plan, proposed on September 17th, consists of two parts. The first involves deploying SM-3 (intermediate to short range missiles) equipped naval ships to oceans surrounding Europe and is estimated to be complete by 2011. The second involves placing clusters of SM-3 missiles in central and southern Europe and should be complete by 2015. The use of sea-based systems allows the missile shield to be more adaptable to future circumstances and more survivable than a fixed system. The SM-3 missiles are not only more proven than the 2006 plan's interceptors, but can also be later adapted to target long range missiles in addition to short and medium range missiles. This shows an attention to Iran's more visible capabilities: because they have not yet developed long range missiles, the SM-3s are better able to intercept potential new aggressive action. The ground-based SM-3s will also be able to target more missiles than those in the 2006 plan. A newer air-, space-, and ground-based sensor system will be used instead of the radar system that was to be built in the Czech Republic. This sensor system is hoped to be able to integrate old, new, and allied radar systems.
According to secretary of Defense Robert Gates, this new system can be deployed sooner, is less expensive, more adaptable, and focuses on countering Iran's current threat: the US, he says, is not abandoning its allies. Obama insists he remains determined to implement a missile defense system. I interviewed Brian Kennedy, President of the Claremont Institute, a prominent conservative think tank, who shared with me the central conservative criticisms of the plan's cancellation. Kennedy is also a member of the Independent Working Group (IWG) on missile defense. Kennedy seemed skeptical of Obama and Gates' intentions, and fears that Obama will never deploy an effective missile defense system.
The cancelled missile defense plan was developed in 2006 and consisted of ten interceptor missiles stationed in Poland with complimentary sensors in the Czech Republic and other sensors in an undetermined central European nation. Initially, the system was estimated to be in place by 2015, but prolonged negotiation and political maneuvering with the Czech Republic and Poland delayed the plan by two years. The original system was designed to defend Europe from approximately five long range missiles from the Middle East, but on Obama's directive was cancelled to make way for a new defense strategy. A related 2006 plan to defend against North Korean missiles, however, is still underway; these interceptors will be placed in Alaska and California, as the original 2006 plan under George Bush dictated.
The new European plan, proposed on September 17th, consists of two parts. The first involves deploying SM-3 (intermediate to short range missiles) equipped naval ships to oceans surrounding Europe and is estimated to be complete by 2011. The second involves placing clusters of SM-3 missiles in central and southern Europe and should be complete by 2015. The use of sea-based systems allows the missile shield to be more adaptable to future circumstances and more survivable than a fixed system. The SM-3 missiles are not only more proven than the 2006 plan's interceptors, but can also be later adapted to target long range missiles in addition to short and medium range missiles. This shows an attention to Iran's more visible capabilities: because they have not yet developed long range missiles, the SM-3s are better able to intercept potential new aggressive action. The ground-based SM-3s will also be able to target more missiles than those in the 2006 plan. A newer air-, space-, and ground-based sensor system will be used instead of the radar system that was to be built in the Czech Republic. This sensor system is hoped to be able to integrate old, new, and allied radar systems.
Be the first to comment on this story