The medium and long-rang defense missile systems acquire increased importance in modern wars tactics and strategic defense plans, particularly with worldwide spread of advanced missiles threats, including ballistic and roaming missiles, planes and drones. It is particularly difficult to attack countries armed with advanced medium and long-range defense missiles which have acquired international reputation after the deployment of the U.S patriot system during the Gulf War. The missiles also gained additional impetus as a result of the U.S anti- missile NMD program which deploys defense missiles against medium and long-range missile on US territory and in the sea to repel ballistic missile attacks or any other missile threat.
Russia has successfully developed an integrated anti-missiles defense system known as “Antey 2005”. It communicates the warning to these centers within no more than 1.6 minutes from the hostile missile launch. The new device is capable of suppressing the effectiveness of the wireless electronics of the anti-missile defenses. It was called the “combat units”.
The U.S has to increase its defense budget by seven folds to reach China’s current defense expenditure.
The U.S justification:
Justifying its call for revising the ABM treaty, the U.S said new dangers are threatening its national security and interests in many regions of the world, including East Asia, the Middle East and the Gulf. It added that it is facing the risk of being shelled with long-range missiles carrying nuclear, chemical and biological mass destruction missiles by what Washington called rogue nations, including North Korea which has developed intercontinental ballistic missiles and Iran which has developed series of Shehab missiles. The U.S claims this threat will increase in the next few years if not met with effective anti-missile defensive means such as the development of an anti-missiles protective shield capable of defending America and its important regional interests.
The project was thrown under the spotlight in the mid-nineties when the U.S defense department announced that it had started research on five anti-missile systems as part of a series of defense programs linked to the strategic defense program proposed in the 1980s and called for setting up regional anti-missile defense systems in various regions of the world. The U.S plans came amid new developments spearheaded by Russia’s successful development of an integrated anti-missile defense system called Antey 2005. It amends the well known S 300 system which several countries have concluded contracts to obtain it.
Bolstering the missile shield:
In this regard, a U.S defense department’s document has revealed that: the U.S administration will ask the congress to release $7.9 billion from the defense budget for the urgent execution of the controversial missile defense system project. A memorandum approved by former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitze said the requested amount is $2.2 billion more than the funding requested in a previous defense budget. According to the former administration’s plan the amount would almost reach $5 billion during the fiscal year beginning on October 1st.
The document shows that “the Pentagon has abandoned a previous more cautious strategy calling for the use of ground interception means stationed in Alaska to destroy missiles in mid-air. The proposed shield project examines the effectiveness of land, air and space missile launching pads for hitting missiles in the operation and launching stages or in mid-air while on course to their targets”.
Obtained by the internet news site “inside defense” the document reflects the first big change in a defense system estimated to cost billions of dollars on the basis of a Defense Department’s comprehensive revision of strategy, forces and weapons. However, the official memorandum stressed that the additional funding to be included in the Pentagon’s comprehensive budget submitted to the Congress will accelerate the technological development.
The U.S defense system
The U.S anti-missile defense system is comprised of the following: A reconnaissance, early warning and space communications system relying on spy and warning satellites that reveal the launching moment of hostile missiles, relaying the information immediately to the communication satellites which in turn relay it to the ground warning centers. The main center is in Barkley, Colorado, U.S, with branches in Britain, Israel, Taiwan, South Korea and the Gulf. The warning is relayed to these centers in no more than 1.6 minutes from the moment of the launch of the hostile missile.
This space warning system is supported by another aerial early warning system relying on reconnaissance planes, command and control Airborne Warning and Control System and ground radar systems.
A central command and central system in the U.S linked to branch command and control centers in several regions including Israel, the Gulf region and East Asia.
This is an anti-missile system capable of intercepting intercontinental and other medium-range ballistic missiles. It includes other anti-missiles means such as radiological weapons relying on laser rays, charged particles rays and neutral atoms for launching space, air and ground stations, engaging the hostile missile within no more than 50 kilometers from its launching site.
The U.S is also looking into the possibility of relying on pilotless planes (drones) to intercept hostile missiles. The success in intercepting field ballistic missiles in regions of interest to the U.S depends on the ability to achieve the engagement at a distance of no more than 50 kilometers after the launching of the hostile missile. This means that the engagement of a 300-600 kilometer-range missile should be at a distance 250 kilometers. But the speed of the intercepting missile should be no less than 5.5 kilometer/second while its first stage speed should be no less than 8 kilometer/second.
A limited success has recently been achieved in intercepting a U.S intercontinental missile by another one launched from the South Pacific Ocean, giving a new push to the U.S administration’s efforts to launch the controversial anti-missile program. The intercontinental missile was launched 4 minutes after its programmed schedule from Vandenberg base, California, to be intercepted by another missile from the Marshal Island. The missile hit its target at a height of 144 miles in outer space.
General Ronald Kadesh, director of the Pentagon’s ballistic defense missiles system said “we believe we have carried out a successful test by any measure at this time”. Kadesh had expected a 50% success chance for the test. The pentagon’s scientists have watched the explosion resulting from the interception of the missile by what is called the “killer vehicle” five minutes after its launch. The interceptor missile had to differentiate between the real target and a mock target, travelling at a speed of 24000 kilometers per hour.
The operation reflects the success of 2 out of 4 similar tests carried out since October, 1999. A previous test failed on September 8, 2000 because the killer vehicle was unable to detach from the intercepting missile. The vehicle once more missed its target seconds before collision due to problems in the infra-red laser mounting system.
Counter measures:
Experts believe that the missile shield has a weak point: it is possible to destroy a ballistic missile in mid-course, but the NMD defense system cannot confront a real hostile system. However, ballistic missiles technology researcher Lizabeth Grunlund of Massachusetts Institute for technology believes that sending a guided missile towards a certain target is one thing, and if the target is smart is another. The target could be an anti-missile system such as metal deposits or false warheads released by a hostile missile to deflect the interceptor missile from its real destination.
This argument is based on real fears. A survey by the CIA showed that china and Russia are ready to sell highly effective anti-missile systems to other nations. This constitutes another loophole in the U.S space shield even in the face of few missiles owned by the countries that denounce the “great Satan”.
European precautions
In its annual report, the international institute for strategic studies has warned that the anti-missile shield will initially provide limited protection for the U.S itself rather than for its allies in Europe and Asia. The institute noticed that despite the change in the tone of the U.S address and the dropping of the word “national” from the project’s name, the missile protection for the allies is still unattainable, particularly in the light of the seemingly remote possibility that the European allies will fund such a project.
The report also believed that president Obama administration’s lack luster search for other options for an anti-missile shield gave the allies some needed respite for their voice to be heard and reach a possible settlement with Russia. The report added: while it seems certain that the U.S will deploy a strategic defense force, the final shape and effectiveness of such a force pose major questions.
The institute concluded that NATO’s European allies will have to take the initiative and join the U.S if they want to have a say in charting the policy guidelines in this domain, as the U.S may seek to renegotiate the ABM anti-missiles agreement signed with Russia in 1972 and strictly curtailed strategic defenses.
The report said that the missile defense system threatens china more than Russia as china possesses only 20 intercontinental missiles.
Therefore, it was only natural for Russia to object to the U.S proposals, resorting to a counter proposal offering Europe a joint defense system. If the Americans are trying to persuade the Europeans to drop their reservations by offering to include them under the American protection umbrella, Russia is also offering a joint protection system covering Europe.
Russia missile system:
The New York Times and the Washington Post have published a report quoting the Russian president as stressing that if the U.S administration went ahead with its project for the deployment of a missile defense system, Moscow will enhance its nuclear capability and there is a possibility for reviving the nuclear arms race. He said: we will strive to bolster our ability to arm our missile with multiple heads… this will cost a small amount of money… the Russian nuclear arsenal will increase many folds .However, he expressed readiness to revise the ABM anti-ballistic missiles treaty signed by the former Soviet Union and the U.S in 1972 rather than abandoning it. He drew the attention to the fact that abandoning this treaty will definitely lead to the abolition of the strategic Arms Reduction Treaties (START 1 and START 2).
It has recently been announced in Moscow that the Russian missile defense system “C.400” is presently in the final test stage. Experts believe that it will join the Russian armed forces weapons within one year. However, strategic expert at the Russian control systems agency, Alexander Shaglov told the Russian “Novo sty” magazine that the former Russian missile defense system “SS-300” is in demand in the world market. He said the new system “C-400) is more sensitive with regard to detecting distant flying targets, has a longer range and higher precision in hitting the target.
He said scores of institution that were part of the structure of the ministries of electronic industries, radio industry and communications industry before forming the nucleus of the then Soviet defense ministries have participated in manufacturing the C-400 anti-missile system. Meanwhile, Moscow tested the first self-propelled missile 26 years ago, indicating that life could be breathed anew in this weapon as a counter measure if the U.S insisted on going ahead with its defense plans. The Russian army stressed that it had test-fired the giant Stiletto missile from a Russian space base in Baikanor, Kazakhstan.
Missile tests are not numerous in Russia, but the test occurred only one week after the former Russian president’s threat to stockpile multiple nuclear warheads as a counter measure to the U.S anti-missile shield.
Stiletto, which NATO refers to as “SS-19” was produced in the mid-seventies and eighties, and is capable of carrying warheads weighing more than 4 tones. A Russian official said: the Russian strategic missiles agency could re-equip this missile to carry up to 6 warheads.
The older SS-18 SATAN is the only larger missile and could carry between 10 to 12 warheads. However, it is about to be completely abolished under the strategic arms reduction treaty START 2.
Topol M is Russian’s latest strategic missile but it is capable of carrying only one ton. It could also be rearmed to carry more than one warhead. It is believed that it will not be possible for several decades to find a missile defense system capable of confronting missiles armed with multiple warheads.
Russian counter defense missiles:
Russian ministry of defense experts say Moscow has effective counter measures to respond to the US anti-missile shield project. They include strengthening the capability of Topol-M intercontinental missile, creating mobile strategic forces, arming missiles with the largest number of nuclear heads and lengthening the life of heavy missiles. Meanwhile, Russia has succeeded in developing an integrated anti-missile system capable of hitting 24 ballistic targets simultaneously. Initial tests proved that it is 98% effective.
Russian engineers have developed a device to be mounted on assault missiles, suppressing the electronic monitoring technologies in the anti-missile ground units. So, it is now possible to suppress all anti-missile ground defenses, using the wireless suppression device. A new discovery in the field of micro-wave radiation, the device was manufactured at the central institute for radio technology research in Moscow. Called the fighting units, it distorts images on the defensive radar screen disguising the missile attack from the ground defenses.
The fighting units are the main element with which assault missiles are armed.
The suppression devices send false images to the radar screen, spreading over the land and air space and beyond.
The suppression devices work according to a pre-planned program: when the missile is launched towards its target the device detaches from it, taking a fighting position around the missile while the distortion device remains in place, making it extremely difficult to monitor or hit the fighting units within the suppression device.
The anti-missile defenses should take into account the presence of strategic missiles between 5,000 to 10,000 kilometers or more during a relatively long journey of 30 minutes outside the ground airspace at a speed of 7 kilometers per second. Also the fighting units are small in size. Conic shaped, they are 1.5 meter long and 0.5 to 0.7 meters in diameter.
The head of the core points towards the target and it is difficult to detect it due to its small visible part. The ground defenses respond with a heavy barrage of missiles trying to hit the assault missiles. Therefore the monitoring devices on the ground should be highly sensitive to ensure high precision.
Despite all these measures, the assault missiles armed with distortion devices could extremely reduce the effectiveness of the ground defenses without consuming much energy.
Field experience has shown that arming missiles with suppression devises requires increasing the number of fighting units accompanying the missiles many folds. They penetrate the ground defenses allowing the use of fewer assault missiles.
Russian, Chinese and European Fears:
The anti-missile defense system, previously known as the space defense initiative remained directed against the former Soviet Union. Although by the end of 1991 the Soviet Union was dismantled, the idea survived. Former president George Bush accorded the space defense initiative, known initially as the national defense utmost priority in the defense plans. The program was once more renamed the missile defense initiative after the U.S allies in Europe complained that the word “national” may mean their exclusion from the system. However, during his tour of European states and some Asian capitals, the U.S secretary of defense has reassured the allies that the defense system is an umbrella that covers them all.
Against whom will this umbrella be raised?
Washington stresses that this system is not directed against Russia, presently considered a friend and partner. Also, American leaders have striven to reassure china that the system is also not directed against it. However, the fact is that: if the U.S succeeded in setting up this umbrella, then the entire Russian and Chinese nuclear arsenal will be within the range of American missiles. And the Russian and Chinese nuclear warheads aboard planes, ships or submarines will be threatened by the American naval and air force.
It is worthy of note that the U.S has no defenses against ballistic missiles carrying nuclear, chemical or biological warheads. And Russia and china claim that if they lose their own means of threatening the U.S, nothing will deter Washington from threatening them in the economic and political domains without provoking a nuclear conflict.
Meanwhile, France objects to the missile defense initiative for quite a different reason: Paris believes that such a defense system will change the U.S from a super power to a sole supreme power fearing no one. Moreover, France believes that this development will spawn a new type of military power giving the U.S superiority over all other nuclear powers such as France, Britain, China and Russia. Meanwhile, the U.S tried to dispel those fears by suggesting that Russia and the West European countries could join the missile defense system. But the issue is easy to discuss, difficult to implement due to the expenditure of millions of dollars on the arms race with the U.S. Many rich European countries will find it extremely difficult to allocate the required funds for this project. And even if the funds were available, Russia and the European nations will rely on American military technology and supplies.
As for china, it has many doubts: Peking believes that the proposed U.S umbrella is designed to provoke a new arms race capable of destroying china’s developing economy. While former president Clinton believes that china is a strategic partner, it is now considered a potential competitor, if not an enemy of the U.S. Although the Chinese defense budget equals 9% of the U.S defense budget, china’s defense expenditure is estimated at 20% of its gross domestic product while the U.S spends less than 3% of its gross domestic product on defense. That means the U.S has to hike its defense budget by seven folds to reach china’s current defense spending. Even though, china may undermine its economy if it tried to double its defense spending to 40% of its gross domestic product.
Washington stresses that the missile defense initiative is basically directed against rogue nations, naming North Korea, Iran and Cuba. But this claim is not convincing as Washington is not taking into account the possibility of a domestic political change in any of these countries during the next 10 to 15 years .This is the period required for completing the work of the missile defense umbrella and its deployment, although the vast majority of analysts believe that changes will occur in the main policies of these nations and their leaders sooner than expected. And even if the U.S claims are true about these nations, they will launch their attacks against U.S allies such as Japan, South Korea, Arab States in the Gulf region and the Middle East. This is because none of the countries accused by the U.S have the ability to produce and stockpile enough intercontinental missiles to attack the U.S itself. Therefore, the umbrella should be developed in the first place to protect the U.S allies.
A recent U.S congress report stressed that the missile defense system (NMD) which the U.S intends to deploy for its protection against external missile attacks will cost the U.S $60 billion till 2015.
According to a study by the Congress budget bureau this amount includes the cost of building 250 anti-missile rockets. It also takes into consideration the inflation rates over the next 20 years, which are extremely unpredictable.
The U.S project which U.S president Barak Obama has finally decided to abandon for unknown reasons represents a clear violation of the balance established by the treaty. This violation is evident in the setting up of the national missile defense system aimed at deploying 20 missiles to intercept missiles that are 25 times faster than sound speed. The second violation is exemplified by the more advanced theater missile defense (TMD) which is aimed at covering the advance of military forces from external bases. This is in addition to fleet movement and the protection of America’s allies worldwide.
Main points of the 1972 missile systems reduction agreement:
According to this agreement, the Soviet Union and the United States agree not to deploy missile defense systems on their territories and not build new defense systems.
Each party is entitled to possess two missile defense systems, one around the capital and the second near the underground barracks for launching intercontinental missiles. The radiation from each area should not exceed 150 kilometers including up to 100 bases for launching missiles.
The agreement permits the development of anti-ballistic missiles systems but prohibits the manufacturing or selection of other anti-missiles system with launching bases whether from sea, air or land.
Also the agreement prohibits the selection of anti-missiles devices that launch more than one warhead on one single occasion or building a feeding system at these bases.
The agreement contains certain restriction on the use of communication and radar stations in this respect, authorizing each state to monitor its implementation by its own technological means.
The agreement stipulates that the two
parties review its provisions once every five years; while each party has the right to withdraw if it believes that its conditions are incompatible with its higher interests.
Kamal Musaed
Strategic affairs researcher