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):
Global Zero presented its action plan for global nuclear disarmament.
According to the plan, an accord should be reached until 2023 at the latest. Complete disarmament would eventually be completed in 2030. Indeed, an ambitious plan.
Yonhap quotes a spokesman of the DPRK’s foreign ministry as stating that “[u]nless the U.N. Security Council offers an apology immediately, we will be forced to take additional self-defense measures to protect the highest interests of our republic. [...] They will include a nuclear test and ballistic missile tests.”
The Center for a New American Security offers a good review of “U.S.-DPRK Negotiations” during the previous three US administrations. Click here to download it.
The current issue of The Journal of Conflict Resolution features – exciting – articles on nuclear proliferation:
Erik Gartzke and Matthew Kroenig A Strategic Approach to Nuclear Proliferation Matthew Kroenig Importing the Bomb: Sensitive Nuclear Assistance and Nuclear Proliferation
Matthew Fuhrmann Taking a Walk on the Supply Side: The Determinants of Civilian Nuclear Cooperation
Erik Gartzke and Dong-Joon Jo Bargaining, Nuclear Proliferation, and Interstate Disputes
Michael Horowitz The Spread of Nuclear Weapons and International Conflict: Does Experience Matter?
Robert Rauchhaus Evaluating the Nuclear Peace Hypothesis: A Quantitative Approach
Kyle Beardsley and Victor Asal Winning with the Bomb
Alexander H. Montgomery and Scott D. Sagan The Perils of Predicting Proliferation
The ippr Commission on National Security for the 21st Century has published a report by Frank Barnaby on dangers of a nuclear renaissance:
With a growing number of latent nuclear-weapon powers, the world is moving into an unregulated state of nuclear anarchy. (p.9)
Busch, Nathan E. and Daniel H. Joyner. eds. Combating Weapons of Mass Destruction: The Future of International Nonproliferation Policy. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 2009. (Amazon)
Joyner, Daniel H. International Law and the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Oxford; New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2009. (OUP web-site)
My colleague Gerhard Mangott has published a book on Russian politics since 1991. I haven’t read it yet, but knowing Gerhard and his work for a couple of years I can definitely recommend it as a very interesting read! The book also contains sections dealing with Russia’s armed forces, its strategic nuclear forces, and missile defense.
As I will be offline for three weeks, I say good-bye with a reading package
The Strategic Studies Institute issued a 691-page Albert and Roberta Wohlstetter reader. You can download it here.
Matthew Kroenig of the Belfer Center’s “Managing the Atom” Program has a very interesting article on nuclear proliferation in the latest issue of the American Political Science Review (click here to download the paper from the Belfer Center’s homepage). Kroenig’s article breaks new ground, because it deals with the – largely unexplored – supply side motivations of nuclear proliferation. Defintely worth reading! Technical aspects are analyzed in the following article:
Forden, Geoffrey. “How the World’s Most Underdeveloped Nations Get the World’s Most Dangerous Weapons.” Technology and Culture 48, no. 1 (2007): 92-103.
A quick publication update: RAND has published two monograps on Iran. As far as I can say after a first glance, “Understanding Iran” seems to be a very valuable resource, because it includes a collection of workshop papers by a number of well-known experts on Iran.
Green, Jerrold D., Frederic M. Wehrey, and Charles Jr. Wolf, eds. Understanding Iran. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2009.
Wehrey, Frederic M., et al. The Rise of the Pasdaran: Assessing the Domestic Roles of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards Corps. Santa Monica, CA: RAND, 2009.
And to round this posting off, enjoy the KCNA’s statement on Obama’s inauguration …
Barack Obama Takes Office as U.S. President
Pyongyang, January 21 (KCNA) — Barack Obama took office as the 44th president of the United States on Jan. 20.
The inauguration ceremony was held at the Capitol building that day.
He made an inaugural address there.
