Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Save to My Library
Look up keyword
Like this
6Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
U.S. Missile Defense and European Security

U.S. Missile Defense and European Security

Ratings: (0)|Views: 1,064 |Likes:
U.S. plans for a missile defense shield in Europe – the European Phased Adaptive Approach – have generated heated debate both domestically and internationally.

The political implications, costs, and technical feasibility are areas of concern for the U.S. Congress. Meanwhile, Russia’s objections to the shield, combined with U.S. political dynamics, are holding up an agreement on missile defense cooperation.
Understanding the current context of European missile defense will be key to moving forward on negotiations between the U.S. and Russia. This Perspective paper takes a look at the complex political and technical issues of U.S. missile defense and European security.
U.S. plans for a missile defense shield in Europe – the European Phased Adaptive Approach – have generated heated debate both domestically and internationally.

The political implications, costs, and technical feasibility are areas of concern for the U.S. Congress. Meanwhile, Russia’s objections to the shield, combined with U.S. political dynamics, are holding up an agreement on missile defense cooperation.
Understanding the current context of European missile defense will be key to moving forward on negotiations between the U.S. and Russia. This Perspective paper takes a look at the complex political and technical issues of U.S. missile defense and European security.

More info:

Categories:Types, Research
Published by: The American Security Project on Jun 21, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

12/20/2012

pdf

text

original

 
       P
       e       r       s       P       e       c       t       i       v       e
www.AmericanSecurityProject.org1100 New York Avenue, NW Suite 710W Washington, DC
U.S. Missile Deense and European Security 
Mary Kaszynski and Daniel Painter
 June 25, 2012
IN BRIEF
•
Te European Phased Adaptive Approach is designed to be exible,adaptable, and cost-eective.
•
 While both the U.S. and Russia have an interest in a missile deensecooperation agreement, negotiations have stalled, partly due to the U.S.political environment and partly due to Russia’s insistence that a coopera-tion agreement take the orm o a legal document.
•
Making progress on the missile deense issue will be key to utureU.S.-Russian nuclear negotiations.
Inrdin
From President Ronald Reagan’s “Star Wars” speech in 1983to President George W. Bush’s withdrawal rom the Anti-Bal-listic Missile reaty in 2002, U.S. missile deense plans havealways been a contentious issue. O particular debate is the U.S.proposal or a missile deense shield in Europe.President Barack Obama’s plan or the European Phased Adaptive Approach, announced in September 2009, hasencountered both criticism and support domestically, and con-siderable opposition rom Russia. Achieving missile deense cooperation with Russia, a goal o both the current and previous administrations, will requireovercoming domestic political divisions and the stalemate withRussia.
Background
Bush and the Tird Site
In 2002, the Bush administration withdrew rom the Anti-Ballistic Missile reaty andembarked on a limited missile deense program to protect the United States rom missilethreats, such as rom North Korea.
 
2
 AmERIcAN sEcuRIty pRojEct
Beginning in late 2004, ground-based midcourse missile deense (GMD) interceptors were deployed at twosites on the U.S. West Coast.Currently, a total o 30 Ground-Based Interceptors (GBIs) are deployed at the two sites - Fort Greely, Alaska,and Vandenberg Air Force Base in Caliornia. Te Missile Deense Agency’s current procurement plans call ora total o 57 GBIs.
1
In 2007, as the “next step...[in deending] America and our NAO allies rom attacks emanating rom theMiddle East,” President Bush announced plans or missile deense elements at a third site - Europe.
2
 Te Tird Site would consist o 10 ground-based midcourse interceptors in Poland, a xed X-band radar inthe Czech Republic, and a mobile radar deployed in an unidentied country closer to Iran.
3
Obama and EPAA 
“o put it simply, our new missile deense architecture in Europe will provide stronger, smarter, and switer deenses o  American orces and America’s Allies. It is more comprehensive than the previous program; it deploys capabilities that are proven and cost-efective; and it sustains and builds upon our commitment to protect the U.S. homeland against long-range ballistic missile threats; and it ensures and enhances the protection o all our NAO Allies.” 
President Obama 
, September 17, 2009
4
In September 2009, the Obama administration unveiled a new plan or European missile deense, based onconsultations with allies and a comprehensive review o U.S. ballistic missile deense.
4
 Te European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) abandoned the ground-based midcourse missile interceptors o Bush’s Tird Site plan in avor o theStandard Missile 3 (SM-3) interceptors.Under the current plan, the SM-3 interceptor will be upgraded in our phasesand deployed initially on Aegis ships, then later on land (the “Aegis- Ashore”sites) in Romania and Poland.Te Aegis elements are to be integrated with a system o sensors and radars.Tis system includes:
•
a orward based X-Band radar site in urkey,
•
mobile Aegis SPY -1D radars on Aegis ships, xed SPY-1D radars in Ro-mania and Poland,
•
an Airborne Inrared (ABIR) sensor platorm, and
•
the satellite- based Precision racking Space System (PSS).Te Administration attributed the new plan to two developments: rst, an intelligence assessment that theIranian missile threat to the Middle East and Europe had increased, and second, to improved capabilities o the SM-3 interceptor that make the EPAA more eective and efcient than the previous system.
5
 While EPAA is the centerpiece o European missile deense plans, it is not the only component o the overall
 
3
European missile deense shield. In 2005, the North Atlantic Council established the Active Layered TeaterBallistic Missile Deense (ALBMD) system.
6
 Te goal o the system was to integrate the existing capabilities o NAO member states into a centralizedcommand and control or the purposes o protecting deployed NAO troops.Te addition o the EPAA allows the ALBMD to move beyond theater deense and employ a territorialdeense or all o Europe.
Policy and Politics
European Missile Deense in Congress
For many years, missile deense was a partisan issue. Republicans, ollowing in the ootsteps o PresidentRonald Reagan, tended to be strong supporters, while Democrats decried missile deense eorts as wasteuland unnecessary.o some extent, this division holds true today. Conservative thinkers support expanding the missile deensesystem and view eorts to cooperate with Russia with alarm.
7
 Tose on the other side o the political spectrum tend to emphasize the costs o the program, technical di-culties, and more skeptical assessments o the Iranian and North Korean missile programs.
8
However, recent scal constraints, coupled with the Obama administration’s embrace o European missiledeense, have made missile deense politics even more complicated.
Cost 
Te United States has spent $150 billion to date on developing missile deense systems. Te Pentagon hasrequested a 29 percent increase or missile deense spending over the next ve years, or a total o $44 billion.
9
 Year-to-year costs or European missile deense may represent only a raction o this total. In scal year 2013,or example, the Missile Deense Agency requested $2.3 billion or procurement and R&D unding or Aegisballistic missile programs.
10
However, the total costs o the EPAA remain unknown.Te White House Ofce o Management and Budget has requested a comprehensive report on the Europeanmissile deense program twice since the announcement o the program two years ago.
11
Te Department o Deense missed the January 2012 deadline but according to DOD ofcials, the cost estimate will be ready “airly soon…sometime this summer is the hope.”
12
 Concerns about escalating costs have ofcials questioning the U.S.’s nancial commitment to European mis-sile deense.
13
In the 2013 National Deense Authorization Act, Congress called or reports on sharing themissile deense costs with NAO members.
14

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->