Missile Defense in Europe: Past, Present and Future

1
Missile Defense in EuropePast, Present and
Future

• Robert G. Bell
• Senior Vice-President, SAIC
• Defense Committee Meeting
• March 4, 2008

2
Missile Defense in Europe The Past

• 1999 NATO Washington Summit
• For the Polish people, NATOs existence has
  always been a sign of hope. We joined NATO in
  the fiftieth year of its existence. Our
  satisfaction is all the greater since NATO
  membership is a symbol of the definite end of the
  almost 300-year long period of misfortune in
  Polish history. Over the past fifty years the
  North Atlantic Alliance has proven its
  effectiveness, its political and military
  umbrella has offered protection to its member
  states. All of us on both sides of the Atlantic
  still need the Alliance. Also today, after the
  fall of the bipolar world order, after the
  collapse of communism and the end of the Cold
  War, NATO and the American presence in Europe
  stabilize the Euro-Atlantic area. They
  contribute to the consolidation of our
  democracies.
• - President Aleksander Kwasniewski
• April 23, 1999

3
Missile Defense in Europe The Past

• North Atlantic Treaty
• Article 5
• The Parties agree that an armed attack against
  one or more of them in Europe or North America
  shall be considered an attack against them all
  and consequently they agree that, if such an
  armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of
  the right of individual or collective
  self-defense recognized by Article 51 of the
  Charter of the United Nations, will assist the
  Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith,
  individually and in concert with the other
  Parties, such action as it deems necessary,
  including the use of armed force, to restore and
  maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

4
Missile Defense in Europe The Past

• 1999 NATO Strategic Concept
• The Alliances defense posture against the risks
  and potential threats of the proliferation of NBC
  weapons and their means of delivery must continue
  to be improved, including through work on missile
  defenses.

5
Missile Defense in Europe The Past

• 2002 NATO Prague Summit Communiqué
• We underscore that our efforts to transform and
  adapt NATO should not be perceived as a threat by
  any country or organization, but rather as a
  demonstration of our determination to protect our
  populations, territory and forces from any armed
  attack, including terrorist attack, directed from
  abroad. We have therefore decided to examine
  options for addressing the increasing missile
  threat to Alliance territory, forces and
  population centers in an effective and efficient
  way through an appropriate mix of political and
  defense efforts, along with deterrence. Today we
  initiated a new NATO Missile Defense feasibility
  study to examine options for protecting Alliance
  territory, forces and population centers against
  the full range of missile threats

6
Missile Defense in Europe The Past

• 2006 NATO Riga Summit Communiqué
• At Prague, we initiated a Missile Defense
  Feasibility Study in response to the increasing
  missile threat. We welcome its recent
  completion. It concludes that missile defense is
  technically feasible withinh the limitations and
  assumptions of the study. We tasked coninued
  work on the political and military implications
  of missile defence for the Alliance

7
Missile Defense in Europe The Past

• Russias Commitment to Territorial Defense
• 1972 ABM Treaty negotiated to allow defense of
  Moscow
• 100 interceptors deployed beginning in early
  1970s now in 3rd generation
• Interceptors nuclear-armed, until recently
• 32 Gorgons with long-range intercept range of
  350km.
• Massive investment in air defense, TMD

8
Missile Defense in Europe The Present
9
Russian Interceptors (12)
Appendix 1. Interceptor Site Korolev
10
Russian Interceptors (16)
Appendix 2. Interceptor Site Lytkarino
11
Russian Interceptors (16)
Appendix 3. Interceptor Site Skhodnya
12
Russian Interceptors (12)
Appendix 4. Interceptor Site Sofrino
13
Russian Interceptors (12)
Appendix 5. Interceptor Site Vnukovo
14
Russian ABM Battle Management Center
Appendix 6. Radar Site PILLBOX
15
Russian MD Radar
Appendix 7. Radar Site - Olenegorsk
16
Russian MD Radar
Appendix 8. Radar Site Mishelevka
17
Russian MD Radar
Appendix 9. Radar Site Balkhash, Kazakhstan
18
Russian MD Radar
Appendix 10. Radar Site - Pechora
19
Russian MD Radar
Appendix 11. Radar Site Gabala, Azerbaijan
20
Russian MD Radar
Appendix 12. Radar Site Baranovichi, Belarus
21
Russian MD Radar
Appendix 13. Radar Site Lekhtusi Another
Voronezh DM of this type is being constructed in
Armavir
22
Russian MD Radar Coverage

23
Missile Defense in Europe The Present

• NATO Active Layered
• Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD)
• Designed to protect NATOs forces and critical
  military facilities, not territory or
  populations
• NATO is not procuring any TMD interceptors or
  sensors they remain in nations inventories
  (e.g., Patriot, THAAD, MEADS, Aster, etc.)
• NATO procuring C3BMC backbone and test bed to
  validate interoperability
• NATO goal IOC in 2011 (lower tier TMD), 2014
  (upper tier TMD)

24
NATO ALTBMD Elements
25
Missile Defense in Europe The Present

• NATO Reaches Missile Defense Milestone
• February 13, 2008
• The opening of a special testing facility in The
  Hague, Netherlands, marks a major milestone for a
  multi-year NATO project to protect forces
  deployed on operations from missile attacks. The
  state-of-the-art facility tests the designs for
  NATO systems that will allow European and U.S.
  missile defense technologies to work together as
  part of a NATO theater missile defense system.
  Once fully implemented, the system will be used
  to protect forces against short- and medium-range
  ballistic missiles. It will also complement
  NATOs current capability against aircraft,
  unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and other aerial
  threats.
• - NATO Press Release

26
Missile Defense in Europe The Present

• NATO-Russia Theater Missile Defense Exercise
• January 22, 2008
• Seeing the Russian officers working side by side
  with NATO officers from a dozen Allied countries
  shows that we have made significant strides in
  enhancing interoperability among our military
  forces. From a military perspective, our
  cooperation is continuing to build in confidence
  and in a stronger mutual understanding of our
  shared values and concerns, which I believe will
  help resolve any political differences.
• - General Henault, Chairman, NATO Military
  Committee

27
NDC TMD CAX Résumé
Russia and NATO forces have proven, that they
can fight and protect jointly territory and
population against missile attacks wherever they
wish to do so, based on jointly agreed procedures
and rules of engagement
Gen Henault, Chairman NATO MC Maj Gen
Yagolnikov, Russian MoD
28
Missile Defense in Europe The Future for NATO?

• Secretary General de Hoop Scheffer, Comments
  following April 19, 2007 Reinforced NAC
• The unanimous view this morning was that
  also in the case of missile defense the principle
  of indivisibility of security should apply
• and in that context there is a shared desire
  ..by all 26 allies, that any United States system
  which will be negotiated and discussed with our
  Polish and Czech colleagues, should be
  complementary to any NATO missile defense system,
  including potentially, I say potentially, a
  system on Active Layered Theatre Missile Defense
  which could be bolted into the other system to
  cover short-range threats to southeast NATO
  territory. Another important element I should
  mention is that there is absolutely a shared
  threat perception between the Allies. Allies all
  agree that there is a threat from ballistic
  missiles. Full stop.

29
Potential Iranian Ballistic Missile Range
30

• Iranian Medium-Range Ballistic Missiles
• (2000-2500 km range)
• Shahab-3 (liquid fuel) derived from DPRK design
• BM-25 (liquid fuel) derived from Russian SS-N-6
• Ashura (solid fuel)
• Source JDW, 28 Nov 07

31
The Iranian Missile Threat

• Irans space rocket launch on February 4th
  adds to general suspicions of Iran regarding its
  potential desire to build nuclear weapons.
  Long-range missiles are one of the components of
  such weapons. That causes concern.
• Russian Deputy Foreign Minister
• Alexander Losyukov
• IHT, February 6, 2008

32
Missile Defense in EuropeThe Future for NATO?

• The Bucharest Summit will be an important
  milestone. It should provide the right momentum
  for a review of NATOs work on missile defense.
  It will also give us an opportunity to bring
  under one roof the four parallel projects
  currently underway
• Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense
• Follow-on to the NATO Missile Defense Feasibility
  Study
• Theater Missile Defense in cooperation with
  Russia and, last but not least,
• American MD project.
• Although many issues may still require
  clarification, the message of the Summit should
  be that NATO is serious about its collective
  defense and missile defense as its essential
  part.
• - Minister of Foreign Affairs Radoslav
  Sikorski Speech at the Munich Security
  Policy Conference
• February 9, 2008

33
Missile Defense in EuropeA Future with Russia?

• There is a place for cooperation with Moscow in
  this scenario. We would like to have Russia as a
  partner in this project, joining us in efforts to
  develop a mechanism of cooperation. We would
  also like to have Russia on board because the
  threat is global in scope. Even a combined
  effort by USA and NATO is not sufficient.
• - Minister Sikorski (cont.)

34
Potential NATO- Russia MD Coverage Against Iran
Moscow ABM Coverage
35
Missile Defense in Europe A Future with Russia?

• Europe Must Speak with One Voice to Russia
• Prime Minister Donald Tusk, IHT, February 18th
• The question is whether, in embarking on talks
  with a strong and demanding partner, we are to
  give up, right from the start, some general
  understandings that are importantonly because we
  anticipate the partner will oppose them.

36
Missile Defense in Europe A Future with Russia?

• The United States looks forward to further
  discussions with the Russian Federation on
  bilateral cooperation and joint activity in this
  important field, including the potential sharing
  of technology and the development of compatible
  systems. Possible areas of partnership with
  Russia could include research and development of
  missile defense systems, sharing of early warning
  data, and exercises between our forces.
• - Press Release by US NATO Amb.
  Nuland following March 28, 2007 Bush-Putin
• phone call

37
Missile Defense in Europe A Future with
Russia?

• Near-Term Steps Recommended by George Schultz,
  Henry Kissinger, William Perry and Sam Nunn
  (January 15th) and embraced by Senator Clinton
  and Senator Obama
• Undertake negotiations toward developing
  cooperative multilateral ballistic-missile
  defense and early warning systems, as proposed by
  Presidents Bush and Putin at their 2002 Moscow
  summit meeting. This should include agreement on
  plans for countering missile threats to Europe,
  Russia and the U.S. from the Middle East, along
  with the completion of work to establish the
  Joint Data Exchange Center in Moscow. Reducing
  tensions over missile defense will enhance the
  possibility of progress on the broader range of
  nuclear issues so essential to our security.
  Failure to do so will make broader nuclear
  cooperation much more difficult.

38
Missile Defense in Europe A Future with
Russia?

•  Russia knows full well that one radar and 10
  interceptors wont change the strategic balance
  and doesnt present any real military problems.
  But for them, a U.S. presence in Central Europe
  is the final confirmation of the loss of their
  influence over this part of Europe. 
• - Dr. Veroniká Kuchynova Šmigolová
• Director, Security Policy Department,
  Czech Republic MFA
• RUSI International Missile Defense
  Conference, London
• February 28, 2008

39
Missile Defense in Europe The Future

• COSTS?
• Connect U.S. 3rd site sensors to NATO ALTBMD
  200-300M.
• Connect (bolt on) NATO ALTBMD to U.S. 3rd
  site for Europe-wide defense against Iran 1B
  (50M/20 yrs).
• NATO deploys its own Europe-wide MD against
  Iranian TBM/IRBM (short- and mid-range threats)
  6B.
• _____________________________________________
• SAIC estimates. All costs are over 20 years
  (life cycle costs), including RD, deployment,
  operation and support.

40
Missile Defense in Europe The Future

• Feasibility of NATO ALTBMD/3rd Site
  Interoperability?
• ltltThe U.S. 3rd site could also serve as a
  catalyst for having NATO focus on the
  shorter-range defenses off of that, and be able
  to connect these systems together. We have
  intentionally designed the technical architecture
  like command-and-control and battle management
  systems to be compatible with NATO ALTBMD. We
  did that intentionally so we could plug these
  together. And were going to actually propose a
  demonstration of that in the near future.gtgt
• -- LtGen Obering
• Inside Missile Defense
• September 26, 2007