web hosting short URLs photo sharing

Jason Perry

30 September 2000

Research Paper A4

Factual Report

A Brief History of the Missile Defense System

On March 23, 1983, then President Ronald Reagan presented to the nation, via a televised speech, his plan for the defense of the nation. In this speech, he proposed a way to intercept enemy missiles before they reached U.S. soil (Boffey 271). This system, termed the Strategic Defense Initiative or SDI, would use lasers, radar, mirrors, and interceptors to protect the United States from ballistic missile attack from Russia or other "rouge" nations. Even though this Initiative is no longer exists as a program, striped down plans for SDI are still with us. This has brought back many of the same debates that the bold Strategic Defense Initiative had when fist proposed.

In the days after Ronald Reagan proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative, critics charged that the system would cost too much, would not work, and would destabilize our relations with the Soviet Union. They found the proposal so fanciful, they even dubbed it Star Wars, after the popular movie trilogy that had ended that same year. Their fears were understandable. Much of the technologies that Reagan proposed for the system were at the very edge of technology. They include space- and ground-based lasers, railguns, ground-based interceptors, space sensors, and kinetic energy weapons (Boffey 98-9). Most required technology that had not been developed as of 1983 (Empty 119).

One of the few parts of the Strategic Defense Initiative that showed success in tests were kinetic-energy weapons (Boffey 94). These weapons destroy enemy warheads by the sheer force of the impact between the warhead and the interceptor (Boffey 92). A successful test was run on kinetic-energy weapons was run by the Army in June 1984. The test involved a dummy warhead launched from Vandenberg AFB in California and a "hit-to-kill device" launched from Kwajalein Atoll in the Pacific (Boffey 74, 92, 94). The hit-to-kill device impacted with the dummy warhead at 5.5 miles per second, destroying both objects instantly (Boffey 92). Though the test was successful, this project ended with this fourth test.

Besides kinetic energy weapons, there were several other proposals for the "Star Wars" system. One was the railgun. The railgun was satellite designed to launch small kinetic-energy projectiles at enemy warheads (Boffey 98). Another major part of the Strategic Defense Initiative was lasers. Lasers would be used focus a high amount of energy on a target, thus destroying it. This is a kin to a child who uses a magnifying glass to focus solar energy on an ant to cause the insect to burn up. The main issues with the use of lasers were how do you produce enough energy to produce a laser that can then destroy the target and where will this laser be. For the first issue, the idea of an X-ray laser came about. An X-ray laser would focus the energy produced by a nuclear explosion onto a target causing the target, either a satellite or a warhead, to blow up (Boffey 99). A major advantage of using a x-ray laser would be that they are light enough that they can be launched into space when they are needed. However, problems developed during testing in the 1980’s so this option lost favor (Boffey 100). The other major issue with using lasers is where they would be put, in space or on the ground. Space-based lasers, though easier to move into position near an enemy warhead, would be far more vulnerable to attack than a ground-based laser (Boffey 98). Ground-based lasers can be protected from attack, much like missile silos, but due to their lack of portability, require the use of mirrors to focus the laser beam on the enemy warhead (Boffey 98). However, the mirrors, like the space-based lasers, would be vulnerable to attack. Also, simply adding mirrors to the warhead can defend against lasers.

The response to Reagan’s proposal for a national missile defense by the rest of the world was mixed at best. Russia had the most reservations because they felt that the "Star Wars" program would break the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that the United States and the Soviet Union signed in 1972. Article V, paragraph one of the ABM treaty states "Each Party undertakes not to develop, test, or deploy ABM systems or components which are sea-based, air-based, space-based, or mobile land-based" (Boffey 265). The Soviet Union felt that because most of Star Wars was in space, the United States was breaking this section. Some countries had reservations about the Strategic Defense Initiative because they felt

The Strategic Defense Initiative is still with us, though in a limited form. The two primary systems that the Defense Department is hoping to implement. The first is called the Theater High Altitude Area Defense which would protect only a small area, like the Korean border or Israel (Miller). The other is called National Missile Defense system, which would protect all of North America. Neither system is designed to protect their theaters from a large-scale attack but instead they are designed to protect their theaters from small attacks from rouge nations.

The Theater High Altitude Area Defense system or THAAD would protect troops or small countries against short- and medium-range missiles (Miller). This is unlike the National Missile Defense system or the Strategic Defense Initiative, which would protect all of the United States and its allies from intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). The need for such a system was shown in 1991 during the Gulf War. During this war, the leader of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was able to attack Israel using theater ballistic missiles. A system like THAAD could have been used to protect Israel from missile attack.

The THAAD system would work much like the kinetic-energy weapons developed in the 1980’s. A 6.2-meter long missile would be launched from a mobile launcher within the theater. Each missile will consist of a booster and a hit-to-kill vehicle. After acquiring the enemy warhead using heat sensors and ground-based radar, the kill vehicle would target and impact with the warhead, destroying both (Theater 1). Recent tests of THAAD have proven successful (Lockheed). However, implementation of the system would not begin for 5 to 10 years.

In addition to THAAD, a national missile defense is being pushed for by the military. However, the system is yet to be approved and will not be approved until the next president takes over (Donnelly). The National Missile Defense system would use ground-based interceptors, X-band radars, early warning radars, and satellites (Pike). Together, they would defend the United States and Canada from small missile attacks from rouge nations. According to the Federation of American Scientists web site maintained by John Pike, the objectives of the National Missile defense are to:

• "Field an NMD system that meets the ballistic missile threat at the time of a deployment decision"
• "Detect the launch of enemy ballistic missile(s) and track"
• "Continue tracking of ballistic missile(s) using ground based radars."
• "Engage and destroy the ballistic missile warhead above the earth’s atmosphere by force of impact."

This system is far more limited than the ambitious system proposed by Reagan. Unlike Star Wars, the National Missile Defense system will be based on Earth. There will be no x-ray lasers, no giant mirrors, and rail guns. The systems would protect the United States from two different sources. The Strategic Defense Initiative would have protected the United States from a large-scale missile attack from the now defunct Soviet Union. The new National Missile Defense system would protect the United States from small attacks from rouge nations like Iran, Iraq, and South Korea (Pike). However, like the Strategic Defense Initiative, the Russians (now the Russian Federation) and the Chinese have shown reservations to the proposal and are refusing to work out an arms reduction treaty until the United States drops the idea (Nebehay).

What does the future hold for the National Missile Defense system? On September 1, 2000, US President Bill Clinton deferred the decision to deploy the National Missile Defense to the next president (Donnelly). How do the two leading candidates from the presidency feel about National Missile Defense? Though both believe that a missile shield is needed, George Bush has presented the boldest plan. Bush would, along with cutting our nuclear arsenal, would build a missile defense as soon as technologically possible. This defense would protect the entire nation as well as our allies and our forces overseas (Walsh 28-29). The White House has called this plan "premature and reckless" (Walsh 29). Gore’s plan is to have 100 missiles in Alaska that would intercept ballistic missiles. This number can be expanded if need be (Walsh 29). However, the entire nation would not be protected with this system (Walsh 29).

Since Reagan’s speech in March of 1983, the world has seen the fall of communism in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Yet the idea for a missile defense remains. However, with the fall of communism, the focus of our defense has changed. Rather than defending the United States and its allies from the "evil empire," the current idea would protect the US from rouge nations like Iraq. Using radar and ground-based interceptors, the National Missile Defense would protect destroy enemy warheads before they reached US soil, like the Strategic Defense Initiative. The much smaller THAAD system would protect small countries and US troop deployments from short- and medium-range missile attacks. Neither system has the size and boldness of the Reagan’s Star Wars, but these "sons of Star Wars" demonstrate Ronald Reagan will have an influence on US foreign policy for decades to come.

Works Cited