Experts Point Out Flaws in Missile Defense Systems, Call for Expansion

September 12, 2012 | Edited by Benjamin Loehrke and Leah Fae Cochran

BMD flaws - A new report by the National Research Council identified major shortcomings in the United States’ missile defense strategy.

--The report argues that overhauling the current Ground-based Midcourse Defense system, adding additional interceptor sites on the East Coast, increasing radar capabilities, and forgoing Phase IV of the Obama administration’s European missile defense strategy would lead to a more effective missile defense architecture. The report also ntoes that enemy countermeasures remain a significant hurdle for any midcourse missile defense system. William Broad at The New York Times has the story. http://nyti.ms/SEcLiL

$33 billion - The NRC report calls for the GMD system to be “completely redesigned, rebuilt and retested,” writes Tom Collina at Arms Control Now. “Given the report’s scathing assessment of current missile interceptor technology, it is surprising that the report calls for not one but two east coast missile interceptor sites as part of a revamped system.”

--As Collina points out, the U.S. taxpayer has spent over $33 billion on the current GMD system. More analysis of the report here. http://bit.ly/OgsdKo

Countermeasures - “Congress should require that before expanding the U.S. system, the Missile Defense Agency subject it to rigorous testing against realistic targets with countermeasures. The system has yet to be tested in this way,” said Laura Grego of the Union of Concerned Scientists. Press release here. http://bit.ly/RLZ62b

Full report - “Making Sense of Ballistic Missile Defense: An Assessment of Concepts and Systems for U.S. Boost-Phase Missile Defense in Comparison to Other Alternatives” by the National Research Council. (pdf) http://bit.ly/OnR2Kf

Favorite quote -“There has been little evidence either of serious cost-benefit analysis or of systems analysis and engineering before embarking on new initiatives within MDA...MDA’s efforts have spawned an almost ‘hobby shop’ approach, with many false starts on poorly analyzed concepts,” states the NRC of the Missile Defense Agency.

How it played -“Report Blasts Military’s Dreams of Destroying Missiles at Launch,” by Robert Beckhusen at Danger Room. http://bit.ly/QJpSOB

-- “Report for U.S. Congress urges East Coast missile site,” by Jim Wolf at Reuters. http://bit.ly/NZriUD

-- “Northern Maine base could deter missiles, National Academy says,” by Christopher Cousin at The Bangor Daily News. http://bit.ly/QQE2b8

Welcome to Early Warning - Subscribe to our morning email or follow us on twitter.

--Have a tip? Email earlywarning@ploughshares.org. Want to support this work? Click here.

Not new - Greg Theilmann and Kelsey Davenport of the Arms Control Association weigh in on last week’s AP story that reported “new and significant intelligence” on Iran’s weapon-related activities. “Close examination of previous IAEA reporting suggests that this intelligence may be significant, but it is not entirely new,” they conclude.

-- “The intelligence on computer modeling referred to by AP could represent greater detail on evidence supporting past allegations of activities related to developing a nuclear-weapons program, rather than evidence of new nuclear weapons related work.” Full story at Arms Control Now. http://bit.ly/QbAGTM

BoG action - Iran’s stonewalling of the IAEA on inspections of the Parchin facility warrant condemnation, argue David Albright and Andrea Stricker of ISIS. “It is time for the Board of Governors to take up this issue and pass a resolution condemning Iran’s actions and sending the issue to the U.N. Security Council for further action.” (pdf) http://bit.ly/QFqSRv

Reports - Classified reports detailed security problems two years ago at the Y-12 nuclear complex where protesters were able to break into this July, according to information obtained by Dana Priest at the Washington Post. The 2010 report “found that security cameras were inoperable, equipment maintenance was sloppy and guards were poorly trained.” Full story here. http://wapo.st/OEVjoc

Quote - “I’m grateful to [Romney] for formulating his stance so clearly,” said Russian President Vladimir Putin of the U.S. presidential candidate’s portrayal of Russia as a #1 geopolitical foe.

--“He has once again proven the correctness of our approach to missile defense problems...The most important thing for us is that even if he doesn’t win now, he or a person with similar views may come to power in four years. We must take that into consideration while dealing with security issues for a long perspective.” ABC News has the quote. http://abcn.ws/RLNmwA

Reader response- Bill Keller’s column, “Nuclear Mullahs” generated such a response from his readers, that he decided to clarify the issue in a new column. He defends his stance that the mullahs are not suicidal, would not hand a nuclear weapon to terrorists, and are unlikely to launch a war, even if they had a nuclear weapon.

-- Keller also debunks the popular myth that the 1981 Israeli strike on Iraq’s Osirak reactor was successful in stopping their program. “The Osirak attack, far from stopping Iraq’s nuclear ambitions, hastened them. After Israel bombed the reactor, Saddam Hussein launched an accelerated, covert program to manufacture nuclear weapons.” http://nyti.ms/Pacwao

Survey - The Chicago Council on Global Affairs conducted a public opinion survey on a range of U.S.foreign policy topics including Americans’ preferred approach to dealing with the current Iran situation.

--Results: “The most preferred approach to ending this threat, endorsed by 80 percent, is the one that the UN Security Council is pursuing: imposing tighter economic sanctions on Iran. Essentially the same number (79%) approve of continuing diplomatic efforts to get Iran to stop enriching uranium. Consistent with this strong support for diplomatic approaches, in a separate question, 67 percent of Americans say the United States should be willing to meet and talk with Iranian leaders. A far broader majority (70%) opposes a unilateral strike by the United States if Iran continues to enrich uranium but the Security Council does not authorize a military strike.” Haartez has the story.http://bit.ly/NYo8QV

Full report - “Foreign Policy in the New Millenium” from Chicago Council on Global Affairs. Iran section starts on page 29. (pdf) http://bit.ly/PiCeYm

Big boom - Edward Teller once suggested creating a 10 gigaton nuclear weapon - some 670,000 times the power of the bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. Alex Wellerstein at Restricted Data has the story and asks if Teller was being genuine, ambitious, or dangerously absurd. http://bit.ly/TKopIa