- MUST READS
- PRODUCTS
- RESOURCES
- MULTIMEDIA
- ENFACTLOPEDIA
- FSM AUTHORS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
- FSM BLOG
- DONATE
- PRESS COVERAGE
SEARCH FSM
- IN THIS SECTION
January 28, 2009
Missile Defense: Now More Than Ever
WMD and ballistic missile proliferation trends makes the case for a missile shield.
Just 10 years ago, there were only six nuclear weapons states. Today, there are nine-with another country knocking on the door of the once-exclusive atom-splitting club.
Twenty-five years ago, nine countries had ballistic missiles. Today there are nearly 30-not to mention that ballistic missile testing hit record post-Cold War highs just last year.
Clearly, the ballistic missile and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) proliferation trend isn't positive. Despite this, a missile defense system that would protect the homeland, American troops overseas, allies and friends remains a controversial idea in some corners of American thought.
While the George W. Bush administration took significant steps to develop sea-and land-based missile defense systems to thwart the growing threat, development of the missile shield is far from complete. Considering just Iran's nuclear efforts, North Korea's assistance to Syria, and robust Russian and Chinese arsenals, it's imperative that the White House and Congress support missile defense programs to close a gaping hole in our national security.
Tehran Trouble
Among present proliferation problems, Iran may be the worst, due to its enmity toward the United States, sponsorship of terrorism, involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan and regional power ambitions.
Tehran insists its burgeoning nuclear program is for peaceful power generation, designed to augment Iran's significant oil and natural gas reserves. (Iran has the world's third-largest oil and second-largest natural gas reserves.)
But an avalanche of evidence tells a different story. It says Iran is involved in a nuclear weapons program that may become operational this year,according to a growing chorus of experts, including the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the United Nations' supposed nuclear watchdog.
The biggest concern is Iran's enrichment of uranium, ostensibly for the production of fuel for its nuclear reactor at Bushehr, currently being built by the Russians-and likely to be completed in 2009.
While Tehran states it has the right to produce reactor fuel under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), the same uranium could be enriched further to produce fissile material for use in a nuclear weapon. (The NPT allows signatories to pursue nuclear programs for scientific or
power-generation purposes, but not military ends. All atomic activities must be declared to the IAEA.)
Iran isn't only continuing to operate a uranium enrichment facility, contravening U.N. resolutions, it's also believed to be involved in the redesign of one of its missiles to accommodate a nuclear warhead. According to the IAEA, the work on a new warhead for the medium-range Shahab-class
missile, which can reach all of the Middle East and parts of southeastern Europe, is underway.
If this isn't unnerving enough, it gets worse. Iran might also be working on another important aspect of a military nuclear program: a long-range delivery system for a nuclear weapon or other WMD.
Like its "civilian" nuclear efforts that remained undeclared to the IAEA for almost two decades, long-range ballistic missiles are likely being developed under cover of Iran's space program. Indeed, Tehran's putative space work could also lead to the development of an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capable of reaching all of Europe-and the United States-with a WMD payload.
Based out of a new space center inaugurated last February by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Iran claims it's involved in the development of a "space launch vehicle," or SLV, for launching satellites. Theoretically, if someone can launch a ballistic missile that can place a
satellite into orbit, he has the scientific wherewithal to reach a target anywhere on Earth with a warhead.
Sure, Iran could want to put satellites in space for communications, military, scientific or research purposes, since it currently relies on others for this. (Russia put Iran's only satellite into space in 2005.) But remember: Moscow's launch of its first satellite, Sputnik, in 1957 meant that not only had the Soviets bested us scientifically but also that an ICBM capacity surely wasn't far behind. That prediction was correct.
Iran's space efforts follow a similarly unnerving pattern. In the late 1990s, North Korea also used a "civilian" space program to clandestinely manufacture and test a Taepo Dong ballistic missile with intercontinental potential. Some experts believe Iran's Shahab, which is based on the North Korean medium-range No Dong missile, could easily morph into an SLV/ICBM program.
Despite mounting evidence to the contrary, Iran could simply be working on a space program. But, considering Tehran's record of nuclear denial and deception, it is hard to believe Iran's space program is not just more of the same.
Korean Concern
From a threat perspective, unfortunately, there isn't much good news out of North Korea, either, regarding its nuclear or ballistic missile programs. While the situation is not as volatile as Iran, North Korea remains a reason for insomnia.
North Korea is already a confirmed nuclear weapons state, lighting off its first nuclear test in 2006-in another of its irascible "I won't be ignored" moments.
Containing-much less rolling back-North Korea's nuclear program, beginning in the early years of the Clinton presidency, has been a tough, frustrating slog. At times, it looked as if the nuclear standoff could lead to another Korean conflict.
The multilateral effort to address North Korea's nuclear program has labored for several years under a six-party process, which includes the United States, China, Russia, Japan, North and South Korea.
Even today, despite North Korea's rhetoric and some actions to the contrary, there remains serious concern about Pyongyang's ultimate willingness to denuclearize, since its nuclear arsenal is its best international bargaining chip. Though some progress has been made in "capturing" the nuclear reactor at Yongbyon, the next steps in addressing North Korea's existing nuclear weapons capability remain unclear.
Making the nuclear weapons issue more than a regional matter is North Korea's ballistic missile prowess, Pyongyang continues to develop a long-range capability to reach out and touch the United States. In 2006, North Korea test fired another Taepo Dong missile, which fortunately malfunctioned like the 1998 launch, this time landing a few hundred miles west in the Sea of Japan. Experts believe the current Taepo Dong series missile is potentially capable of reaching Hawaii and the West Coast of the United States. A missile with a longer-range capability is expected.
North Korea also poses a threat to U.S. forces stationed in East Asia with its single-stage No Dong missile. The No Dong can reach American bases and forces in Japan, which might be called upon in a Korean peninsula contingency.
On the peninsula, 25,000 American troops also face a North Korean ballistic missile threat, consisting of several hundred short-range "Scud" missiles capable of reaching targets in the South within minutes of launch. While questions exist about its ability to successfully develop a nuclear warhead
capable of withstanding medium- and long-range missile flight, North Korea's Scuds can launch chemical and biological weapons.
Adding to the angst about North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities are Pyongyang's off-Korean peninsula proliferation: North Korea appears to have secretly assisted Syria with a nuclear program of its own. In a September 2007 raid, Israeli fighters leveled a Syrian nuclear facility, which, as details dribbled into the media have shown, was being built by the North Koreans.
The concern is that a destitute North Korea may be willing to work with any number of state actors-or non-state actors such as terrorist groups-on nuclear and ballistic missile matters if the price is right.
China Challenge
While not an avowed adversary of the United States, China is involved in an intense competition with America for power and influence in the Asia-Pacific region, and indeed, across the globe.
China's great power ambitions are buttressed by a robust military modernization effort, which has been growing at a double-digit rate for more than a decade now, giving Beijing the world's third-largest defense budget.
Moreover, according to some security analysts, China has the world's most active ballistic missile production program-a likely reflection of the unresolved situation surrounding the long-standing political standoff with China's cross-Strait rival, Taiwan. To deter Taipei's movement toward
independence or other acts Beijing considers "hostile," China has deployed more than 1,000 short-range ballistic missiles along the coast opposite Taiwan, according to the Pentagon.
Apropos of what it considers outside interference in internal affairs, China maintains medium- and intermediate-range missile forces for deterring, delaying or denying the intervention of foreign military forces in a Taiwan contingency, including the United States.
China has modernized its land-based strategic nuclear deterrent, too, adding advanced, mobile ICBMs to its arsenal; it's planning to put a nuclear deterrent to sea in nuclear submarines, as well.
Of equal concern to the growing capacity of China's ballistic missile force is the continuing potential for proliferation of WMD and ballistic missile technology or materials, especially to Iran and North Korea.
Russian Rise
Russia isn't an enemy of the United States yet, but it, too, desires to play a leading role on the world stage, balancing other centers of power such as the European Union and NATO with its political, economic and military might.
Russia has readjusted its foreign policy orientation from one that was Western-looking to one that is increasingly anti-West. The Kremlin is clearly focused on reasserting Russia as a great power-again.
To achieve these ends, Russia maintains its position as the world's second-mightiest nuclear weapons state, with more than 600 strategic offensive nuclear weapons. Its ballistic missile force is part of that effort.
Russia now has one of the world's most active ballistic missile testing programs. With a 30 percent bump up in its defense budget, Moscow may double ICBM test launches this year, according to Russian military claims.
Adding to security concerns, Russia is threatening to pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty, which banned that specific missile class in an 1987 arms control pact with the United States. It has also offered to build nuclear reactors for Latin American troublemaker,Venezuela.
Elsewhere, no fewer than 10 North African and Middle Eastern states have declared new nuclear programs to the IAEA since 2006 in a likely "hedging" movement against Iran's atomic aspirations.
What Do We Do?
Not surprisingly, the Bush administration decided that leaving America deliberately vulnerable to ballistic missiles and their potentially devastating payloads-as was the case during the Cold War-was foolish.
And rightfully so.
Vulnerability can lead to perceptions of weakness, inviting threats, intimidation, blackmail or coercion-or even outright aggression by potential adversaries.
While missile defense has its critics, few can argue against the idea that every state has an undeniable right to self-defense. Accordingly, it only makes sense that all reasonable, necessary steps are taken to protect one's national security.
It especially makes sense if the technological capability to do so is emerging, as evidenced by nearly 40 successful U.S. missile defense tests. Although once incomprehensible, hitting a bullet with a bullet in the atmosphere-or even space-is now possible.
Moreover, missile defense is a defensive-not offensive-weapon system. The interceptor doesn't even contain an explosive charge: Traveling at 15,000 miles per hour, it destroys the incoming missile simply by colliding with it.
Indeed, missile defense threatens no one. It only undermines the capability of one country to threaten or attack another country with its ballistic missiles or WMD. The idea that the deployment of missile defense will provoke an attack or create instability is a canard meant to encourage
passivity in the face of an existing, indeed, growing, missile and WMD threat.
Fortunately, President Bush didn't buy into these specious arguments, either. He kept his campaign promise, deploying a system in Alaska and California to thwart North Korea and proposing a system in Europe to address Iran.
In the 21st century, choosing between Cold War-era mutually assured destruction, known as "MAD," or massive retaliation shouldn't be the only options for policymakers in dealing with current or future missile or WMD threats.
In the end, missile defense will improve America's security against the growing challenge of ballistic missiles and their unconventional payloads, but only if the work of developing and deploying a system continues.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor Peter Brookes is a Senior Fellow for National Security Affairs at the Heritage Foundation and is a member of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission. Feedback: editorialdirector@familysecuritymatters.org.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)
| Print This E-mail This |
|
