Blog

Earlier this month, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) tested the Airborne Laser Test Bed, designed to destroy a short-range ballistic missile during the boost phase. A Boeing 747 tracked the target, but the experiment ended early after a software malfunction. From the MDA:

“The Agency plans to resume flight experiments beginning with tests of the software repair on September 13 leading to a lethal shootdown experiment involving a solid-fuel target missile by the end of this month. A mid-October experiment is in the planning stages that will involve lasing a solid-fuel missile at three times the range of last February’s successful destruction of a liquid-fuel missile.”

In related news, UPI reports that an orbiting missile defense satellite successfully transferred target track data from its acquisition sensor to its tracking sensor.

Northrop Grumman’s Aerospace Systems sector vice president of missile defense and missile warning programs Gabe Watson said, “This is a major success for the STSS program. We proved that the STSS satellites can autonomously transition from target acquisition and track mode using the acquisition sensor to target precision track mode using the multiple band track sensor. All of these operations occurred as intended, with no operator intervention. This is the same type and sequence of functions that will be performed on-board during subsequent MDA missile tests.”

While the eyes of the world are focused on rogue nations like Iran and North Korea, China is quietly bolstering its missile capabilities. Voice of America reports that China is developing a ballistic missile with a range of at least 930 miles, and its first aircraft carrier.

Experts speculated about China’s reasons for shoring up defenses, which include re-taking Taiwan by force should the island nation declare independence, and defending against U.S. intervention in such a conflict.

East-West Center senior fellow Denny Roy said, “The Chinese have long had particular expertise in missile development, so it is natural that they would rely on this as a way of countering U.S. strength. It is much easier for the Chinese to build an anti-aircraft carrier missile than building an aircraft carrier battle group.”

Despite its military power build-up, said expert James Nolt of the World Policy Institute, China lags behind the U.S. in military capabilities. “They talk about China without comparing it to the U.S. in any systematic way, which if they did, it would be very easy to see that China’s power is vastly smaller in many areas and its capabilities are vastly limited compared to the U.S.”

The Heritage Foundation‘s Peter Brookes recently wrote about China’s military build-up in the New York Post.

“[W]hile the US strategic arsenal desperately needs updating,” he writes, “Chinese nuclear forces are being modernized across the board…”And China’s warhead numbers are up, by some estimates even doubling in recent years. The Pentagon says Beijing may now be able to put multiple nukes on a single, newly developed, road-mobile missile.”

The Heritage Foundation‘s Peter Brookes penned an op-ed for the New York Post on START and China’s build-up of nuclear weapons. An excerpt:

“So, before there’s any final vote on an arms-control pact that would endure for the next 10 years, it’d be wise to give some thought to Beijing’s burgeoning bevy of bombs.

“While the exact shape of China’s grand ambitions may not be clear, there’s little question they exist. Few would dispute that Beijing wouldn’t mind taking the head seat at the table of global powers, now occupied by Washington.

“As such, China has been growing all aspects of its national power: political, economic and military. Nor is the last limited to a break-neck conventional buildup; its strategic forces are booming, too.

“China long relied on a small, land-based nuclear force of ICBMs in fixed silos and on a limited number of road-mobile missiles, providing for a ‘sufficient and effective’ deterrence in Beijing’s eyes.

“But the force has started getting bigger, better and badder. For instance, while the US strategic arsenal desperately needs updating, Chinese nuclear forces are being modernized across the board.

“And China’s warhead numbers are up, by some estimates even doubling in recent years. The Pentagon says Beijing may now be able to put multiple nukes on a single, newly developed, road-mobile missile.”

“Indeed, if any country can undertake a so-called ‘rush to [nuclear] parity’ with the United States and Russia, it’s China, especially considering its aspirations, wealth and willingness to lavish largesse on its armed forces.

“Basically, Beijing could become a nuclear peer competitor of Washington and Moscow in the not too distant future, in light of the expected arms cuts under New START….It doesn’t end there.”

Henry Sokolski , executive director of the Nonproliferation Policy Education Center in Washington, D.C., has written an article for Armed Forces Journal on our current missile defense capabilities. An excerpt:

“In an effort to reduce U.S. military reliance on nuclear weapons, the Obama administration is emphasizing how much more America can rely on advanced non-nuclear weapons to defend its interests, allies and friends. There’s only one problem: The White House’s plans to deploy these forces — including new non-nuclear missile defenses and long-range conventional ballistic missiles — don’t quite add up.

“The missile defense system the Obama administration has advocated may be incapable of countering the missile threat the Pentagon is projecting. Meanwhile, the long-range conventional ballistic missile system it’s working on is unlikely to be able to reach anything but a mere handful of targets.

“None of this, however, is inevitable. Both programs can be enhanced, but only at the risk of upsetting America’s two largest potential rivals: China and Russia. Still, enhancing these programs will limit the harm either competitor might otherwise be able to inflict on the U.S. and its allies. More important, it would put the U.S. in a far better position to get Beijing and Moscow to agree to deep ground-based missile reductions and to cooperate on missile defenses, which, in turn, would make all parties far safer.

“This is conceivable if the U.S. had the right offensive and defensive programs in place. Unfortunately, it doesn’t yet.

“Take the administration’s missile defense efforts. The Pentagon announced last fall it was deploying the first fully tested version of a system known as the Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) to neutralize Iran’s shorter range rockets. After 2018, it says it will begin deploying an entirely new variant to neutralize Iran’s intermediate and intercontinental-range ballistic missiles. U.S. intelligence agencies last fall said Iran was most likely to deploy these sometime after 2020.

“This all seemed sound enough until Defense Secretary Robert Gates announced in April that, with sufficient foreign assistance, Iran’s longest range rockets could fly by 2015 — five years earlier than originally projected. Some outside experts have doubted that the much ballyhooed advanced variant of the SM-3 — the SM-3 Block II B — could be effective against intercontinental ballistic missiles on any timeline. There has never been any question, though, of the Pentagon being able to field it before 2015. It can’t.”

Earlier this week, India tested its missile interceptor defense shield, designed to detect and destroy incoming ballistic missiles, but the test failed after radar lost track of the Prithvi 2 target missile (nuclear-capable). The interceptors weren’t launched. (Source: AFP)

India is developing weapons to protect itself from China and Pakistan. Last November, India test-fired a nuclear-capable, medium-range missile, a surface-to-surface Agni-II with a warhead range of 1,560 miles.

The Heritage Foundation’s Lisa Curtis and James Carafano wrote an article about directed-energy (laser) missile defense and cooperation between the U.S. and India in developing this technology. They noted the versatility of both low- and high-powered lasers, which can neutralize ballistic missile threats from a range of sources. In lieu of a full-scale retaliation, high-powered lasers can limit the scope of reprisals and contain the inevitable damage.

In 2008, the Nuclear Suppliers Group, comprised of 45 countries, lifted a three-decade ban on nuclear trading with India. The country first tested an atomic bomb in 1974 and again in 1988. India refused to sign non-proliferation agreements. Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said the lifted ban “marks the end of India’s decades-long isolation from the nuclear mainstream.” He added, “It is a recognition of India’s impeccable non-proliferation credentials and its status as a state with advanced nuclear technology. It will give an impetus to India’s pursuit of environmentally sustainable economic growth.” Singh traveled to the U.S. and met with President George Bush.

On the anniversary of the Islamic Revolution, Iran announced that it was now a nuclear state, capable of enriching higher levels of uranium. The rogue nation recently announced plans to build two more uranium enrichment sites, although it still claims the nuclear enrichment is for peaceful and scientific purposes.

Despite these developments, Iran stated in a document reportedly seen by news organizations that it’s ready to give up most of its stockpile of enriched uranium in a simultaneous exchange for fuel rods, and the exchange must take place on its territory. The U.N. has rejected this offer. Under the International Atomic Energy Agency’s terms, Iran would hand over the uranium and wait up to a year to receive fuel rods.

China and Russia both refuse to support further sanctions against Iran and claim to seek a diplomatic solution.

Meanwhile, Iran revealed plans to build 10 more nuclear enrichment plans, including the two previously mentioned. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu proposed an energy embargo against Iran, with or without the U.N.’s approval.

How will the U.S. respond?

General David Petraeus said on “Meet the Press” that given our attempts to resolve differences with Iran diplomatically, the U.S. can “now to go on what is termed the pressure track. That’s the course on which we are embarked now.” He added that the administration will “send the kind of signal to Iran about the very serious concerns that the countries in the region and, indeed, the entire world have… about Iran’s activities in the nuclear program.”

Talking tough is one thing; following it up with action is another. What will this “pressure track” against Iran entail? The U.S. has already given Iran too wide a berth. While we’re trying to be diplomatic, Iran is enriching more uranium and building more nuclear sites.

Last week, the Heritage Foundation‘s James Carafano wrote at National Journal Online that we can speed up the process of freedom in Iran and contain nuclear proliferation by adopting “tough unilateral sanctions that hit the regime in the gut.” He added that the president needs to “spare no effort to shame Iran for its horrific human rights record, and…put the ‘third site’—the deployment of missile defense to Poland and the Czech Republic–back on the table. Take out every avenue Tehran has to threaten the West.”

(Sources: Reuters and AFP)

 
In September, sources reported that the U.S. was interested in selling $7.8 billion worth of Patriot fire units, missiles, and other weapons to Turkey. The arms would help Turkey, which borders Iran, defend itself against missile threats. Today’s Global Post reports that Russia and China also seek to sell missile defense systems to Turkey.

Defense contractors Raytheon and Lockheed Martin will bid for the contract. If successful, the sale would be the “largest single Turkish purchase of military equipment to date.” However, Turkey’s military said it won’t pay over $1 billion for a missile defense system.

In light of the IAEA’s censure against Iran and Iran’s threat to build 10 more nuclear sites, the arms sale couldn’t be more timely. “It’s clearly not in Turkey’s interest to see a nuclear Iran; they don’t want to see a nuclear-armed competitor on their border,” said Ian Lesser, a senior transatlantic f’llow at the German Marshall Fund of the United States. “But they do fear that this can happen. And modernizing Turkey’s air defense system looks pretty important from that perspective.”

According to the source, Turkey denies its defense system sale is related to Iran. Why? Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said, “We neither have a perception of threat from any of the neighboring countries, nor have any military- or security-related preparation against them.”

Whatever you say, Mr. Davutoglu. After all, Iran has claimed its nuclear ambitions are “peaceful” and “scientific.”

 
Several years ago, Iran admitted having a uranium enrichment plant. The U.S. and other countries suspected this plant wasn’t the only one. After some digging, the U.S. found evidence of construction of a second site.

Today, the United Nations’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) censured Iran for secretly building its second nuclear facility near Qom, an Islamic holy city. (Source) The IAEA monitors the first nuclear site. True to its roguish reputation, Iran said on Sunday it would build 10 more such facilities as a result of the censure. Russia, which refused to issue tougher sanctions against Iran, backed the censure.

Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, Ramin Mehmanparast, said his country will “confront the resolution legally.”

Iranian nuclear official Ali Akbar Salehi said, “We had no intention of building many facilities like the Natanz site. But apparently the West doesn’t want to understand Iran’s peaceful message.” (Source) Iran is maintaining the “peaceful” and “scientific purposes” stance, yet the country threatens to build more nuclear facilities.

Although the former Soviet Union backed the censure, presumably out of concern, it will assist Iran in developing its first nuclear power station as planned. Mehmanparast said, “Our plan is still being pursued, we must be on our own and provide our fuel ourselves.”

Back in January, the Heritage Foundation’s Lisa Curtis and James Carafano wrote an article about directed-energy (laser) missile defense and cooperation between the U.S. and India in developing this technology. They noted the versatility of both low- and high-powered lasers, which can neutralize ballistic missile threats from a range of sources. In lieu of a full-scale retaliation, high-powered lasers can limit the scope of reprisals and contain the inevitable damage.

India’s back in the news. Defense News reports that India recently test-fired a nuclear-capable, medium-range missile, a surface-to-surface Agni-II with a warhead range of 1,560 miles. Additionally, India has the Agni-III, which has a range of about 1,864 miles.

India is developing weapons to protect itself from China and Pakistan. See the Office of Naval Intelligence’s report on China’s navy.

As China continues building its intercontinental ballistic missile program, a threat against U.S. surface fleets, and the country’s modernizing efforts have resulted in an “increasingly sophisticated and proficient naval force,” according to the U.S. Office of Naval Intelligence. Download the 51-page report (PDF), “A Chinese Navy with Modern Characteristics.”

An excerpt:

“In response to expanding national interests and revolutionary changes in warfare brought about by long-range precision weaponry, civilian leadership in Beijing began to view the navy as an increasingly critical component of China’s national security structure. To support Beijing’s objectives regarding Taiwan, to deny an adversary access to the region during times of crisis, and to protect China’s vital sea lines of communication, naval power became the key to China’s security concerns. In the late 1990s, Beijing embarked on a program to build a modern navy in a relatively short time.”

China’s improvements fall in three areas: Anti-Surface Warfare, Naval Air Defense, Force Projection.