By Marina Malenic
A new plan for missile defense deployment in Europe relies on proven capabilities and is much more flexible in the face of a changing threat environment than the Bush administration’s plan, Defense and State Department officials said recently.
Army Lt. Gen. Patrick O’Reilly, director of the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency, said the new missile defense architecture will have a “growth path” as threats evolve and will rely on a networked system of smaller sensors for more accurate tracking of enemy missiles.
“Instead of relying on large radars, we will network smaller sensors to produce a very accurate track,” O’Reilly said during a conference at the Atlantic Council in Washington.
O’Reilly also said the Pentagon was studying the possible use of missile-tracking sensors aboard drone aircraft.
President Obama last month announced plans to alter the Bush administration’s missile defense architecture by changing its emphasis to interception of short- and medium- range missiles. The new vision calls for scrapping a radar system that would have been based in the Czech Republic and 10 two-stage Ground-Based Interceptors (GBI) planned for silos in Poland. The administration has cited new intelligence, indicating that Iran has speeded development of shorter range ballistic missiles instead of ICBMs, as the primary reason for the shift.
The Obama plan calls for deployment of sea-based and, eventually, land-based SM-3 missiles at multiple European sites. The plan emphasizes using technology that is “proven” and “cost-effective.” It calls for fielding a mix of land-based Patriot and PAC-3s in Europe, as well as ship-based SM-3 Block IAs deployed in the Eastern Mediterranean beginning in 2011. Two additional phases of SM-3 block development would be ready beginning in 2015 and then 2020, according to the plan (Defense Daily, Sept. 18).
Officials yesterday reiterated that the cost of the new formulation would be significantly lower than that of the previous vision. For example, while a single GBI costs about $70 million, Ellen Tauscher, under secretary of state for arms control and international security, noted that SM-3 Block IAs cost about $10 million per round.
Tauscher also said that deploying thoroughly tested systems like Patriot and SM-3 creates a better deterrent than the untested GBIs that would have been placed in Poland.
“Having proven systems in there will only increase U.S. credibility with both our allies and our adversaries,” she said.
Former Pentagon Comptroller Dov Zakheim disputed characterizations of the new plan as cost-effective.
“In order to do this, we will need more Aegis ships,” he said, “and ships cost far more than any kind of missile.”
He also questioned the rationale for changing the old plan based on intelligence estimates.
“First, there’s nothing new here,” he said, regarding revised intelligence estimates. “And, with all due respect to the intelligence community, they’ve not had a very good track record when it comes to estimating these things.”
Speaking at the same conference, Rep. Michael Turner (R-Ohio), ranking member of the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee, criticized the administration for scrapping what was an “irritant” to Russia and not gaining any concessions from Moscow.
“When Secretary Tauscher says there was no quid pro quo [for Russia], I believe her,” he said. “We got nothing.”
Turner also advocated giving both Poland and the Czech Republic the “right of first refusal” on any new Patriot and land-based SM-3 deployments in Europe.