Theater Ballistic Missile Defense, an Achilles Heel for the United States

1999 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian K. Corey
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Ballistic Missile Defense

scholarly journals The US Anti-Missile Potential in Asia-Pacific

2019 ◽  
pp. 90-103
Author(s):  
Evgeny Zvedre
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
Pacific Region ◽  
Defense System ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Local Conditions ◽  
The Us ◽  
Ballistic Missile Defense

The USA considers missile potentials of Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as the main sources of threats to their national security. In the early 2000s following the withdrawal from the Soviet-American ABM Treaty the US began to deploy a global ballistic missile defense system to protect their “homeland, US forces abroad and its allies” from potential and real threats. The set of basic elements of a multi-layer ballistic missile defense is generally the same, its architecture is always adapted to the local conditions of the regions of deployment and specific tasks. Their common designation is the ability to work as subsystems within an integrated, global in scope antiballistic missile defense system controlled by the United States. In the Asia-Pacific region, the United States is actively engaging its regional allies Australia, South Korea and Japan in a joint effort to build-up ABM capabilities while simultaneously increasing its military-strategic presence in the region. Moscow strongly opposes the program considering it as potential threat to the effectiveness of the Russian strategic nuclear forces and undermining strategic stability and considers emergence the ballistic missile subsystems in Europe and the Asian-Pacific Region as a direct threat to its security. US ABM policy provokes the accelerated development by China and the DPRK of ballistic missile delivery systems, encourages Russia to create new weapon systems that are guaranteed to be able to overcome any existing and future missile defense.

scholarly journals The Development of the US National Missile Defense and its Impact on the International Security

2015 ◽  
pp. 43-48
Author(s):  
J. Yu. Parshkova
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Former Soviet Union ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
International Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Ballistic Missiles ◽  
The Us ◽  
National Missile Defense

The article reflects the US officials' point of view on the development of its national missile defense. The major threat to international security is the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. The United States and the former Soviet Union made huge efforts to reduce and limit offensive arms. However, presently the proliferation of ballistic missiles spreads all over the world, especially in the Middle East, because of the ballistic missile technology falling into the hands of hostile non-state groups. Missile defenses can provide a permanent presence in a region and discourage adversaries from believing they can use ballistic missiles to coerce or intimidate the U.S. or its allies. With the possible attack regional missile defense systems will be promptly mobilized to enhance an effective deterrent. The ultimate goal of such large-scale missile defense deployment is to convince the adversaries that the use of ballistic missiles is useless in military terms and that any attack on the United States and its allies is doomed to failure. The United States has missile defense cooperative programs with a number of allies, including United Kingdom, Japan, Australia, Israel, Denmark, Germany, Netherlands, Czech Republic, Poland, Italy and many others. The Missile Defense Agency also actively participates in NATO activities to maximize opportunities to develop an integrated NATO ballistic missile defense capability. The initiative of the development of US BMD naturally belongs to the United States. That country has enormous technological, financial, economic, military and institutional capabilities, exceeding by far those of the other NATO members combined.

Collapse of the Consensus and the Struggle for Coherence, 1969–1970

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Cameron
Keyword(s):  
National Security ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
Defense System ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Henry Kissinger ◽  
Richard Nixon ◽  
The Us ◽  
Ballistic Missile Defense ◽  
Nuclear Arms Control

This chapter shows how Richard Nixon and his national security advisor, Henry Kissinger, were forced to change their strategy for nuclear arms control based on the collapse of the US congressional consensus behind nuclear superiority. Nixon entered office with strong convictions on the importance of nuclear superiority for supporting the United States’ national security commitments. Nixon also saw US technological advantages in ballistic missile defenses as one of the main bargaining chips to cap the growth of Soviet offensive forces at the upcoming Strategic Arms Limitation Talks. This strategy for détente was thrown into disarray, however, when Congress signaled its lack of support for a new ballistic missile defense system and the strategy of nuclear superiority. Nixon and Kissinger then changed tack, attempting to conclude a quick arms limitation agreement through backchannel negotiations with Soviet Ambassador Anatoly Dobrynin. This initiative failed, weakening the American hand at the formal talks.

The rise and fall of the Third Site of Ballistic Missile Defense

2010 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-187 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nik Hynek ◽  
Vit Stritecky
Keyword(s):  
Czech Republic ◽  
International Security ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
The United States ◽  
Ballistic Missile ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
The Czech Republic ◽  
The Third ◽  
Ballistic Missile Defense ◽  
The Cold War

The present article examines the tumultuous development in the issue of the Third Site (also known as the Third Pillar) of the US Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) that was planned to be hosted by the Czech Republic and Poland. The article analyzes the entire ‘life cycle’ of the project, from its formal proposal in 2007 by the former U.S. President George W. Bush to its cancellation in 2009 by the current U.S. President Barak Obama. Without any doubts, the Third Site of BMD put Poland and the Czech Republic at the centre of international security politics and as such allows one to see how the two post-communist countries acted and reacted to related international positions, expectations and challenges. A detailed analysis of this issue, nevertheless, does not exhaust aims of this article. Whether brief or detailed, any look at the coverage of the issue reveals that the Czech Republic and Poland have invariably been lumped together through the construction of the imagery of the New Europe as a homogeneous political bloc. It will be argued that such a view is flawed and needs refinement. In order to back the claim, the issue of the Third Site is put into a historical context, revealing that the differences between the Czech and Polish international-security preferences and expectations after the end of the Cold War have been quite stable – including the most recent development after the project has been shelved by the United States, and can thus be conceived of in dialectical terms.

scholarly journals EUROPEAN MISSILE DEFENSE AS A NEW FORM OF INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION OF USA ON MISSILE DEFENSE

2013 ◽  
pp. 120-126
Author(s):  
E. A. Degtereva
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Intermediate Step ◽  
Defense System ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
Adaptive Approach ◽  
Defense Systems ◽  
Foreign Countries ◽  
Ballistic Missile Defense ◽  
The U.S

This article examines U.S. efforts to build a broad international coalition in the area of missile defense. The basic formats of military cooperation with foreign countries in the deployment of the U.S. global missile defense system are described, as well as the principles of cooperation on the part of the United States. A review of the regional missile defense systems created by the United States as an intermediate step on the way to a global missile defense system is provided. Particular emphasis is placed on the implementation of The Phased Adaptive Approach for Missile Defense in Europe (European Phased Adaptive Approach, EPAA) and the creation of Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD). Specified milestones and activities under the program, as well as the practical difficulties faced by the U.S. and European countries to deploy missile defense in the context of the global economic crisis are analyzed.

The Decision to Deploy the ABM: Bureaucratic and Domestic Politics in the Johnson Administration

1972 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 62-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Morton H. Halperin
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Soviet Union ◽  
San Francisco ◽  
Domestic Politics ◽  
The United States ◽  
Arms Race ◽  
Johnson Administration ◽  
Missile Defense ◽  
The Soviet Union ◽  
Ballistic Missile Defense

Why did the Johnson Administration decide in the late 1960's to deploy a ballistic missile defense system in the United States? In attempting to answer this question we need to seek an understanding of several distinct decisions and actions. The most puzzling event occurred in San Francisco on September 18, 1967, when Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara delivered an address to the editors and publishers of United Press International. McNamara devoted the first fourteen pages of his talk to a general discussion of the strategic arms race, emphasizing the limited utility of nuclear weapons and the fact that neither the United States nor the Soviet Union had gained any increased security from the arms race. With this as background, he turned to a specific discussion of the ABM issue

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document