As the United States and its regional allies are beefing-up missile defenses in the Gulf, Iran announces the development of a light plane called “Faez” (Fars News, February 8 2010) and the inauguration of two production lines for two unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). According to Fars News (February 8, 2010),

[t]he two hi-tech drones named ‘Ra’d’ (Thunder) and ‘Nazir’ (Harbinger) are capable of conducting long-range reconnaissance, patrolling, assault and bombing missions with high precision.

Ra’d which is a UAV of choice for assault and bombing missions has the capability to destroy the specified targets with high pinpoint precision.

Experts believe that once the UAV enters the scene of aerial missions, it would enhance the reconnaissance, patrolling and defensive power of the Islamic Republic of Iran’s Armed Force.

Yes, I am suggesting a connection here. As I understand it, small planes and stealthy drones could be used to overcome missile defense systems (either in concert with or prior to an attack with ballistic missiles).

Iran also sends a message to Russia: Heshmatollah Kasiri, a high-ranking commander of the Iranian Air Force, was quoted as saying that Iran will develop an air defense system which will be superior to Russia’s S-300.

“Today, we are building all our air defence weapons by ourselves … the only thing we wanted to import was the Russian S-300 which so far they have not delivered for some unacceptable reasons [...] But our air defence experts and scientists found a way and in very near future we will produce an air defence system which has the capabilities of the Russian S-300 or even more.” (Middle East Online, February 8, 2010)

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

Returning from a short holiday I found my mailbox and feed-reader stuffed with news … a lot of new input for the upcoming missile defense conference:

• Iran tested a new missile called “Kavoshgar-3″ - click here for an analysis by the one and only ACTWonk.
• Romania’s president announced that his country will - after approval by the Romanian parliament - host components of the US missile defense system.
• The DoD has published its BMD Review (click here to download). I’ll have a look at it and post on it in the next days.
• Russia has a new military doctrine and Nikolai Sokov has an analysis of it. As Pavel Podvig notes, the new doctrine includes important changes in the realm of nuclear weapons.

A lot of stuff to read for the next week I wish you a nice week-end!

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

Missile defense afficinados know that the recent test of GMD failed. In addition to a video of the launch I want to share Riki Ellison’s (Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance) impressions and thoughts on the test, failure, and - of course - the need to do more in the realm of missile defense:

Dear Members and Friends,

On a perfect sunny winter afternoon in California standing on the flat rocks of the Ronald Reagan Memorial overlooking the missile silos on the Pacific shoreline at Vandenberg Air Force Base, the Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) engines light up with brilliance and the rocket disappears for a few seconds in the clouds of exhaust. The rocket reappears, accelerating and ripping through the clear sky with a single white vapor trail arching overhead as the low thunder sound doesn’t catch up to what you are watching.

[…]

The Ground-Based Interceptors in Vandenberg, California and Fort Greely, Alaska are our only defense against the long-range ballistic missile threat fast coming upon us. As President Obama said to our nation last week, “the greatest danger to the American people… is the threat of nuclear weapons.”

We need more than ever “True Grit” and determination for Missile Defense.

Respectfully,
Riki Ellison

In a speech in Paris, Secretary Clinton emphasized Washington’s readiness to co-operate with Russia on BMD (after similar statements by Lavrov):

We are working with our allies to ensure that NATO has the plans it needs for responding to new and evolving contingencies. We are engaged in productive discussions with our European allies about building a new missile defense architecture that will defend all of NATO territory against ballistic missile attack. And we are serious about exploring ways to cooperate with Russia to develop missile defenses that enhance the security of all of Europe, including Russia.

Missile defense, we believe, will make this continent a safer place. That safety could extend to Russia, if Russia decides to cooperate with us. It is an extraordinary opportunity for us to work together to build our mutual security.

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

The New York Times reports on US plans to deploy Patriot batteries in four Middle Eastern states (maybe Qatar, the UAE, Bahrain, and Kuwait - click here to download a graphical overview of the deployments provided by The Guardian) and two AEGIS cruisers in the Persian Gulf.

In this context, Travis Sharp’s two posts on the vulnerability of AEGIS destroyers and David Gormley’s recent ACT article on the proliferation of cruise missiles (see also his book “Missile Contagion“) are very insightful. For a discussion of missile defense in the Middle East see my recent article in Middle East Policy… Anyway, the main deterrent will not be Patriot but US personnel operating the batteries.

On the week-end I also came across a report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) comparing different missile defense options for the protection of Europe and the United States. Remember my earlier posts (here and here) on missile defense deployments in Turkey? The report weighs four options, the third option being

Land-based SM-3 Block IIA interceptors operating from mobile launchers at two existing U.S. bases: Ramstein Air Force Base in Germany and Incirlik Air Force Base in Turkey. Tracking would be provided by forward-based transportable X-band radars in Azerbaijan and Qatar. This system would be available around 2015. (p. xiii)

As far as the ability to defend Europe and the US is concerned, the report notes the following:

The other alternatives in this analysis (Options 2, 3, and 4) would provide broad defense of most of Europe against all modeled missile threats. All of those options include interceptor locations nearer to Iran than the proposed European Interceptor Site in Poland and thus would provide more extensive defense of southeastern Europe. (emphasis added; p. xvii)

The options with sea-based and land-based SM-3 Block IIA interceptors (Options 2 and 3) would provide some additional defense of the United States against liquid-fuel ICBMs but none against solid-fuel ICBMs. Those options could provide about the same level of U.S. defense as MDA’s proposed European system if they added launch sites for SM-3 Block IIA interceptors in the United States. (p. xviii)

Here is the report’s graphical summary (p. xix) for the defense of Europe (click here to enlarge):

P.S. The four horsemen ride on video:

You can order the film at th The Nuclear Tipping Point web-page.

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

since my last post here.

The reason for my lack of activity is … yes, the missile defense conference. To give you a brief up-date: we have expanded the program to include an additional panel on missile defense and missile non-proliferation.

You can download the detailed program here. To register for the conference (no fees) click here.

Apart from the conference, there are some other things I want to share with you:

Three papers …

• ISIS on Burma.
• Rolf Mowatt-Larssen of Harvard’s Belfer Center on AlQaeda and WMD.
• Matthew Kroenig of Harvard’s Belfer Center on “The Differential Effects of Nuclear Proliferation.”

and the thrill of waiting for the announced unveiling of new missiles and weapons by Iran:

A top commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards said on Tuesday that the country’s armed forces will unveil several missiles and weapons at the 31st anniversary of the Islamic revolution next month.Mehr news agency quoted commander Massud Jazayeri as saying: “Several missile and weapons projects will be unveiled during the 10 days of dawn (February 1 to 11) by armed forces.” (AFP via Asian Defence, Janauary 26, 2010)

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

Check out the Martin Andrew’s China Brief (Vol. 10, Issue 1) on “China’s Conventional Cruise and Ballistic Missile Force Modernization and Deployment”.

The Russians clearly regard the threat from China’s ballistic and cruise missiles as serious, deploying S-400 missile and radar systems along its eastern borders ostensively to protect Russia from wayward North Korean missiles (RIA Novosti, August 26, 2009). Interestingly, no North Korean missiles are recorded as having accidentally landed in Russia.  North Korean missiles are launched eastwards toward the Yellow Sea away from Russia and China. The S-400 deployment did however coincide nicely with China’s October 1 parade.

[...]

A 2008 U.S. government estimate reported that all of China’s 300 km range DF-11 and 600 km range DF-15 SRBMs facing Taiwan amounted to a combined total of between 970 and 1,070 missiles along with 200 GLCMs (Annual Report to Congress: Military Power of the People’s Republic of China 2008). The amount of these launchers facing Taiwan is around 210 to 250, assuming each DF-15 TEL is capable of firing three missiles, and each DF-11 can fire five missiles before needing to be refurbished. For every DF-15 TEL deployed there needs to be one missile-reloading vehicle and two for each DF-11, as each reloading vehicle is assumed to carry two missiles. Add a command and communications vehicle or two and this means a lot of road movement by large vehicles that could easily attract attention.

Well, it seems that there is an increasing potential for a trilateral (US-RF-PRC) arms dynamic …

UPDATE: The New York Times reports (January 11, 2010) that, according to Chinese media, China tested “ground-based midcourse missile interception technology” on Monday. The NYT report also quotes Hans Kristensen of the FAS as arguing that ”[t]here is an obvious concern in Beijing that they need an effective anti-ballistic missile defense in some form.”

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

It is reported (World Nuclear News, January 8; NTI, January 8) that Libya is taking further steps in the implementation of its civilian nuclear program:

the Libyan Atomic Energy Institute has begun “activating” agreements signed with what it describes as friendly countries on the peaceful use of nuclear energy, and is also working towards issuing a nuclear law. The passing of a federal law on the peaceful use of nuclear energy is an important step towards establishing the necessary legal and regulatory framework for any country wishing to embark on any a nuclear power program of any scale. (Source: World Nuclear News)

Libya (like the UAE) has been and will be taken as a role model, in particular to increase pressure on Iran to come clean with the international community about its nuclear program.

Re: nuclear co-operation - Open CRS has a report by Paul Kerr on the U.S.-India Nuclear Deal (click here to download it).

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

Let me first wish you a happy, healthy and successful New Year! It will certainly be an eventful year for the arms control community and a decisive year for the goal of a nuclear-weapons-free world.

On January 14, the editors of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists will move the doomsday clock. Click here to watch a live stream of the event.

Now back to missile defense:

NTI reports (January 7, 2010) that Taiwan will eventually receive PAC-3:

Lockheed Martin Corp. has been cleared to sell Patriot Advanced Capability 3 systems to Taipei, said Washington’s unofficial embassy in Taiwan. The new armaments, defense experts say, could give Taiwan the ability to eliiminate short- and medium-range missiles launched from China.

The Patriots appear to be the final component of a $6.5 billion weapons deal approved in the final months of the Bush administration. “This is the last piece that Taiwan has been waiting on,” said Wendell Minnick, Asia bureau chief for Defense News.

I doubt that this arms sale will contribute to stability in the region. Moreover, it is not unlikely that it will fuel China’s suspicions regarding Washington’s missile defense plans.

In the Middle East, Israel is advancing its multi-tier missile defense system as Iron Dome (click here to watch a video on Iron Dome by its manufatcurer Rafael) has successfully completed final tests and “is planned to be integrated into the Israeli Army within six months, officials said.” (Defense News, January 7, 2010)

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

I’m sorry for my long absence from the blog - a lot of good and bad things have kept me busy. Anyway, I promise a higher posting frequency in the new year (I know that this is actually the most frequent promise on many, if not most blogs …).

Sean O’ Connor has an interesting up-date on the Irans’s Tabriz missile site (his previous posts on Iran’s Tabriz and Khorramabad sites are here and here). Do not miss Sean’s article on Iranian Strategic SAM Deployment, which ends with the following conclusion:

On the surface, Iran’s ground-based air defense picture appears to be relatively robust thanks to the presence and reach of the seven S-200 batteries. However, a closer analysis reveals an overall coverage which is currently full of holes and vulnerabilities that a potential aggressor could exploit. The Iranian strategic SAM force is obviously in need of a serious upgrade, one which is more substantial than simply producing modified HQ-2 missiles. The presence of air interceptors and numerous terrain constraints do explain away some of the negative aspects of Iran’s SAM network, but taken as a whole it represents a relatively ineffective form of defense against a modern agressor. Given the current political climate, it would be in the best interest of the Iranian military to proceed with a widespread upgrade, with the most effective option being the purchase of S-300PMU-2 or S-400 SAM systems for Russia, or perhaps the more cost-effective and similarly capable HQ-9 SAM system from China. Incorporating either purchase into a package deal with modern fighter aircraft such as the Su-30MK or J-10 would result in a much more robust air defense capability.

Another up-date on Turkey and missile defense: “Turkey objects to plans of deploying U.S. missile defense elements on its soil because it could worsen relations with Russia and Iran, national media reported Wednesday.” (Ria Novosti, December 16, 2009).

The program of our conference “Ballistic Missile Defense: Global and Regional Dynamics” (at the Diplomatic Academy of Vienna on February 18 and 19, 2010) is now complete and registration is possible.

Panel I – Ballistic Missile Defense and the Great Powers

Recent Trends and Prospects of U.S. Missile Defense Policy
Bernd Kubbig, Peace Research Institute Frankfurt

Europe
Anthony Seaboyer, German Institute for International and Security Affairs

The Russian Federation
Gerhard Mangott, University of Innsbruck

The People’s Republic of China
Xia Liping, Tongji University

Chair: Jürgen Wilzewski, University of Technology Kaiserslautern

Panel II – Ballistic Missile Defense in East Asia and the Pacific

Motivations of Regional and External Actors
Camilla T. N. Sørensen, University of Copenhagen

The Impact of Missile Defenses on Regional Stability:
A Positive View
Robert Schmucker, Technical University Munich

The Impact of Missile Defenses on Regional Stability: 
A Negative View
Xia Liping, Tongji University

Chair: Martin Senn, University of Innsbruck

Panel III – Ballistic Missile Defense in the Middle East

Motivations of Regional and External Actors
Anoush Ehteshami, Durham University

The Impact of Missile Defenses on Regional Stability: 
A Positive View
Uzi Rubin, Rubicon Defense Consulting

The Impact of Missile Defenses on Regional Stability: 
A Negative View
Reuven Pedatzur, Tel Aviv University

Chair: Gudrun Harrer, Der Standard

Round-off Speech: Ballistic Missile Defense and Global Zero

Martin Senn, University of Innsbruck

Chair: Gerhard Mangott, University of Innsbruck

Click here for a detailed program and to register for the conference. I’m looking forward to meeting you in Vienna!

If your still looking for a Christmas holiday reading, I recommend the following.

I wish you a merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!!

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites

Last Friday, the IAEA Board of Governors adopted resolution GOV/2009/82 (earlier IAEA resolutions, reports and SC resolutions on Iran are availbale on the IAEA website) and thus passed the case to the Security Council. The ArmsControlWonk features interesting information on the wording of the latest resolution. In a comment Mark Fitzpatrick argues that, unlike resolution GOV/2005/77, resolutions GOV/2009/82 and GOV/2006/14 do not explicitly mention Iranian non-compliance. As fas as GOV/2009/82 is concerned, Fitzpatrick notes that:

the Board should have made a similar explicit finding of noncompliance, using that term. I expect that the drafters omitted it in order to get a larger number of yes votes, and to try to preserve some (very) small prospect of a deal on the TRR fuel.

Iran has reacted with usual defiance:

President Ahmadinejad declared that Iran would construct as many as 10 new enrichment plants and explore indigenous ways of enriching urnium for its medical reactor. Moreover, Iranian parliamentarians have demanded further restrictions to Iran’s cooperation with the IAEA and the withdrawal from the NPT:

“We have options ranging from complete and full cooperation to leaving the Non-Proliferation Treaty on our table,” said Kazem Jalali, spokesman for the parliament’s national security and foreign policy committee. “But we believe that if the West reforms its path, we can still choose the full-cooperation option.”

However, withdrawing from the NPT seems to be an unlikely option as the costs of such a move (making sanctions and even a military strike more likely; further international isolation; delegitimizing its claim to nuclear energy) would outweigh any benefits (if there are any at the present stage). The drastic expansion of its enrichment capabilities also appears to be beyond Iran’s technological capabilities.

Save/Share Bookmark

Hide Sites