Blog

Missile defense skeptics Theodore A. Postol and George N. Lewis disagree with the Pentagon’s assessment of the effectiveness of the Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) interceptor.

The New York Times cited Postol’s and Lewis’s article that the SM-3′s success rate is lower than the Pentagon claims.

While Postol and Lewis applaud President Barack Obama for scrapping Bush-era plans to deploy missile defense shields to Poland and the Czech Republic, they’re critical of his missile defense plan to counter short- and medium-range missiles with the SM-3.

The authors and the Pentagon agree that the SM-3 interceptor must hit a missile’s attached warhead—and not merely the body of the missile—to destroy the weapon. They diverge on the success rate. The Pentagon maintains that SM-3′s interception rate is 84 percent, while Postol and Lewis say it’s only between 10 to 20 percent.

Missile Defense Agency spokesman Richard Lehner responded to the critics at DODLive.com:

“The allegation that target intercepts were reported as successful when they were not successful is wrong, and the data presented by the authors in the article is flawed, inaccurate and misleading.

“In each successful intercept test the target missile was destroyed by the Aegis BMD/SM-3 system due to the extreme kinetic energy resulting from the ‘hit to kill’ intercept. In each instance, the mission objective of ‘hit to kill’ of the unitary or separating target was achieved.

“Postol and Lewis apparently based their assessment on publicly released photos gleaned from a sensor mounted aboard the SM-3 and postulated what they perceived to be the interceptor’s impact point although they had no access to classified telemetry data showing the complete destruction of the target missiles, or subsequent sensor views of the intercept that were not publicly released so as not to reveal to potential adversaries exactly where the target missile was struck.

“Actually, the publicly released videos, which can be seen at www.mda.mil/news/gallery_aegis.html, and from which the still photos were extracted, show infrared images from both interceptor and airborne sensors demonstrating the complete destruction of the target missiles.”

Last week, Romania agreed to host missile interceptors (Standard Missile 3) as part of the president’s new missile defense plan. These missiles will be in place to defend against attacks from Iran, but once again, Russia believes their purpose is offensive. (UPI)

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said the U.S. broke its promise to keep the Kremlin abreast of its missile defense developments in the region, and NATO representative Dmitri Rogozin asked, “How can we stay calm when alien military infrastructure, U.S. military infrastructure, has come to the Black Sea area?”

How will our missile defense plans in Romania affect negotiations for the START renewal? “It is impossible to talk seriously about a reduction of nuclear capabilities when a nuclear power is working to deploy defensive systems against nuclear warheads possessed by other countries,” Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov said.

The missile interceptors will be deployed to Romania by 2015. Obviously, these and other developments will impact START negotiations, giving Russia an excuse to stall. Earlier this month, Poland announced that the U.S. will deploy Patriot missiles to Poland near the Russian border. In response, the former Soviet Union announced it would beef up its Baltic fleet. Signed in November, the deal between the U.S. and Poland also sends about 100 U.S. troops to Poland.

(Source for all quotes: UPI)

The Obama Administration is finally doing something that is likely to lessen the threat posed by an aggressive Iran. It is following the lead of the George W. Bush Administration and looking to expand missile defense capabilities in the Persian Gulf.

This is according to a January 31, 2010 article in The New York Times. This step has many advantages for the United States and its friends and allies in the region regarding the Iranian threat. Reflective of a “protect and defend” strategy, it offers a defensive solution that serves to demonstrate the aggressive intent of Iran. The alternative is to give the Iranians a first strike option. It also does not require the global consensus that has been holding up the imposition of effective sanctions against Iran. This is not to say that this step should substitute for the diplomatic effort to impose sanctions on Iran, only augment it.

Third, it provides direct reassurance to U.S. friends and allies in the region and strengthens security ties there. Fourth, it will serve to lessen the pressure on the friends and allies there that do not have nuclear weapons to seek them in the future. Likewise, it will lessen the likelihood that the friends and allies that may have nuclear weapons will be put in a circumstance where they would compelled to use them. This last point is critical. Last fall, The Heritage Foundation ran a series of exercises based on an abstract of Middle East regional setting, where all the nation-equivalent players were presumed to have nuclear weapons and the means to deliver them. The exercises demonstrated that pursuing a defensive option resulted in fewer nuclear weapons. On the other hand, a nuclear conflict broke out when the player equivalent to the United States simultaneously relied on nuclear retaliatory options, pursued a policy of nuclear disarmament and chose not to pursue defensive options.

The Obama Administration, however, needs to close the circle on this productive step. The plan is to place the Patriot missile defense batteries in four Persian Gulf states and Standard Missile-3 missile defense interceptors on Navy ships in the Gulf. These steps will permit a defense against shorter-range missiles. The problem is that these current systems will not provide a defense to the United States or its friends against the longer-range missiles that Iran is seeking. This will permit Iran to focus on threatening the United States directly in order to drive a wedge between the United States and its friends and force the United States out of the region. It is an obvious window of vulnerability that the Obama Administration must close.

The Obama Administration can close this window of vulnerability by taking three steps. The first is to upgrade the sea-based missile defense system to make it capable of countering longer-range missiles. This sea-based system could also be used to protect the United States against an Iranian launch of a short-range missile off the coast that carries and electro-magnetic pulse nuclear warhead. Such an upgrade program should be put on the fast track. The second step is to restore the larger number of Ground-based Midcourse Defense interceptors that are designed to counter long-range missiles that were proposed by President Bush. The Bush Administration proposed placing 44 such interceptors in Alaska and California and ten in Poland. President Obama, last year, made the unwise decision to scale back the number to be place in Alaska and California to 30 and cancelled the agreement with Poland. The most powerful step the Obama Administration could take to close this window of vulnerability is to announce that it will revive a proposal of the Reagan Administration and the George H.W. Bush Administration to put missile defense interceptors in space. This is a missile defense program that will serve to put the Iranians on the defensive.

 
U.S. defense contractor Raytheon announced that it’s creating a land-based version of the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) for Israel, a system that would help our ally defend against Iran. (Source)

Part of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, the SM-3 is a ship-based anti-ballistic missile. Last week an SM-3 successfully hit its target in space.

Discussed at the recent missile defense conference in Huntsville, Alabama, the land-based version of the SM-3 could be in operation by 2013. Raytheon’s Michael Booen told Reuters, “If the program goes through to production and is deployed globally with international allies, the potential value … will be more than $1 billion.”

Reuters reports that the cost of developing the SM-3 for Israel would be “very low.” Additionally, the Pentagon may use SM-3 systems as alternatives to missile shields in Poland and the Czech Republic. In fact, the Pentagon would be wise to develop the systems with these countries in mind. At this point, the fate of shields in the region are in doubt. Missile defense expert Riki Ellison said Russia may be more favorable to SM-3 systems than missile defense shields.

>> Defense contractors Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing are vying for a missile defense deal that could bring in $200 million a year.

Reuters reports that all three contractors want the chance to operate and sustain the Ground-based Midcourse Defense system (GMD). John Holly, a Lockheed senior executive, said his company has “the right skills and the capability.”

Boeing’s GMD director of operations and sustainment said his company “is the lowest risk option for the work because of this experience and success on the program.”

>> Russia is gearing up for a new kind of space race with the U.S. A commander in the Russian air force said his country will develop a defense system that will counter the “threat” of our space-based missile defense capabilities. We may have the ability to hit any Russian target from space by 2030, and Russia’s response is to build a competing rocket.

A Russian general said, “The development of air and space offensive weapons by foreign states demonstrates that by 2030 radical changes will take place in the exploration of air and space as an integral sphere of armed struggle.”

With George Bush out of office, any plans to produce a weapon with such capacities are in doubt. The U.S. and Russia are in talks to renegotiate START, and if previous compromises are any indication, Russia may not have to worry about the development of a space-based target-hitting weapon. (Source)

>> A Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) successfully hit its target in space. Part of the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, the SM-3 destroyed a short-range ballistic missile. (Source)

**The U.S. Air Force announced that an unarmed Minuteman 3 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) was successfully test-fired earlier this week. Launched from Vandenberg Air Force Base, the ICBM hit its target over the Pacific Ocean near the Marshall Islands.

Lt. Col. Lesa Toler, 576th Flight Test Squadron commander and the mission director, said, “The fact that we can randomly select an on-alert operational ICBM from any missile wing and launch it without making any modifications to the components to hit a bulls-eye target is a testament to the system’s reliability.” (AP)

**The U.S. Navy has announced the successful interception of a ballistic missile target over the Pacific Ocean, the first Third Fleet operation firing to use the Standard Missile-3 against a ballistic target.

Vice Adm. Samuel J. Locklear, Commander, U.S. Third Fleet, called the engagement “extraordinary” and that it “highlights the successful transition from developmental test flights to operational fleet execution and demonstrates the viability of the Maritime BMD Concept of Operations.” (SPX)

**Sources report that Bahrain is conducting a missile defense exercise with the U.S. According to Bahrain’s official news agency, the exercise is a joint effort with the U.S. Central Command to “boost military cooperation.” The Persian Gulf country has a cooperative agreement with our country’s military. (AFP)

**Earlier this week, a Japanese newspaper reported that the government was “moving towards” launching an early warning missile defense satellite. The newspaper said it received a draft of the ballistic missile defense plan, which contains information about deploying an early warning satellite that would monitor and warn against offensive missile launches. (UPI)