|
| The Global Freedom Institute |
| Bush�s Missile Shield: Will it work? (Page 1) In 1968, the first article on missile defense, written by Physicists Richard L. Garwin and Hans A Bethe, explained the problems of such a system and how easy it would be to elude such a system. Largely based on this article, the 1972 ABM Treaty was negotiated and signed. In the 1980�s, President Reagan restored the idea to America�s mind with his SDI initiative, which started the research into the current missile defense systems. At the end of the Cold War, many put the idea out of their mind again. However, Republicans in Congress put the idea back on the table with enough force to push President Clinton into continuing movement and later acceptance by Americans. President Bush recently stated his plans to actually deploy such a system. However, many people don�t know much about the systems much less the implications for deploying such a system. The Bush plan is based on the Rumsfeld report and is designed to defend against smaller threats of ballistic missile attack on the United States. Those threats are limited missile attack by �rogue� states such as Iraq and North Korea, and miscalculated or accidental launch by the Chinese or Russians. While those threats are debatable (and will be dealt with in a separate article), what needs to be evaluated is the policy of deploying the missile defense system that President Bush advocates. This article will outline the system, look at its ability to shoot down missiles and the implications of deploying such a system. The system that President Bush wants to deploy is a combination of a National Missile Defense (NMD) and Theatre Missile Defense (TMD). The �missile shield� will be designed to protect the U.S. and its allies. This explains the need for President Bush to give our best missile technology to our allies, which he has promised to do (they include Japan, Israel, S. Korea, and NATO countries). Those missiles will be deployed in those countries to help protect our allies as part of a TMD. So how does the system work? When a country launches a missile, it would be detected by one or more of the large phased-array early warning radars in California, Alaska, Massachusetts, Britain and Greenland, as well as infrared early-warning satellites. This early detection allows for the missiles to be tracked and project its trajectory for possible interception. During this process, a ground-based radar system would be able to focus on a smaller area for more accurate data for interception. Almost immediately, the interceptors would be launched and fed information on where to intercept the incoming missile. The information is continuously fed to the interceptor up to the time of interception. There are a few different interceptor systems in President Bush�s Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD). The first interception system ever deployed was the Patriot Missile system during the Gulf War. Its rates of success vary depending on who you ask. The U.S. military says the Patriot system had a 60% success rate of intercepting incoming targets. Most others who evaluated the data put the figure much lower than that. Some as low as no intercepts, claiming what was seen on TV was video from tests. The truth probably lies somewhere in between. Considering that the Patriot system had 17 hits in 17 tests, this was a failure. But also the best interception record to date and only one of two interception systems that has a perfect test record. The Patriot is part of the short-range interceptor strategy. The Army�s Theatre High Altitude Area Defense system (THAAD) is the primary system of those being used in the deployment of a shield. It is similar to the Patriot system due to its use of missiles to shoot down other missiles. However, it is designed to shoot down ICBMs in space, prior to the reentry into the atmosphere. Once an ICBM is launched, it enters space and then deploys the warhead(s) to reenter the atmosphere and land on a specific target. THAAD is designed to hit those warheads, after they deploy, but before they enter the atmosphere. THAAD, thus far, has hit 1 missile in 7 tests. The Navy�s Area Defense system, which includes the Aegis detection systems, carries ship based interceptors for theatre defense and is considered to be part of the overall missile shield. While theatre missile interceptors are considered more reliable because they intercept slower missiles over a smaller area, there has been little success here either, so far. The Air Force is developing the basis for the most reliable system of using Anti-Ballistic Lasers (ABLs), but thus far, this is not part of the missile defense shield. ABLs are the only system of interception being considered that have a 100% hit percentage in testing. However, because it is not part of the missile defense shield being proposed by republican lawmakers and the President, it only has one test. The current plans for a missile shield rely on interceptors, which are nothing more than missiles designed to hit missiles rather than other targets. Of the current tests, interceptors are a combined 2 of 16, or a 12.5% success rate in hitting their targets. During tests, the targets have not been complex, but rather the simplest of systems. This has to make people wonder just how well they will work for the $28 billion price tag (lowest GAO estimate). The first Patriot tests went 17 for 17 in hits, while performing below 60% effective in the field, depending on whom you listen to. With the current 2 of 17, this should not inspire confidence in the current systems. Just how easy is it to defeat such a system? Not very difficult at all. There are several different variations of methods to defeat such a system. Next Page |
|
|