There Goes The Neocon Star Wars Dream Again

By Steve Hynd

Back when, sensible heads decided that the notion of space-based weaponry wasn't cost effective either in a dollars sense or in the sense of making the U.S. any safer. Ever since, "conservatives infatuated with St. Reagan" have been trying to resurrect it, no matter how dumb a notion it was. They always saw Bush's plans for missile interceptors and radars in Eastern Europe as part of that ressurection, and haven't made any secret of their views, pushing hard for those sites based more on a fear of Russia than a fear of any "rogue state" and a fervent wish for first strike capability.

As David noted earlier, the Obama administration has destroyed their dream yet again. Spencer Ackerman relates that the decision was one unanimously endorsed by the Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs - Obama listening to his commanders just like the neocons are always exhorting him to do.

President Obama has approved the recommendation of Secretary of Defense Gates and the Joint Chiefs of Staff for a phased, adaptive approach for missile defense in Europe. This approach is based on an assessment of the Iranian missile threat, and a commitment to deploy technology that is proven, cost-effective, and adaptable to an evolving security environment.

Starting around 2011, this missile defense architecture will feature deployments of increasingly-capable sea- and land-based missile interceptors, primarily upgraded versions of the Standard Missile-3 (SM-3), and a range of sensors in Europe to defend against the growing ballistic missile threat from Iran. This phased approach develops the capability to augment our current protection of the U.S. homeland against long-range ballistic missile threats, and to offer more effective defenses against more near-term ballistic missile threats. The plan provides for the defense of U.S. deployed forces, their families, and our Allies in Europe sooner and more comprehensively than the previous program, and involves more flexible and survivable systems.

The Secretary of Defense and the Joint Chiefs of Staff recommended to the President that he revise the previous Administration�s 2007 plan for missile defense in Europe as part of an ongoing comprehensive review of our missile defenses mandated by Congress. Two major developments led to this unanimous recommended change:

* New Threat Assessment: The intelligence community now assesses that the threat from Iran�s short- and medium-range ballistic missiles is developing more rapidly than previously projected, while the threat of potential Iranian intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) capabilities has been slower to develop than previously estimated. In the near-term, the greatest missile threats from Iran will be to U.S. Allies and partners, as well as to U.S. deployed personnel � military and civilian �and their accompanying families in the Middle East and in Europe.

* Advances in Capabilities and Technologies: Over the past several years, U.S. missile defense capabilities and technologies have advanced significantly. We expect this trend to continue. Improved interceptor capabilities, such as advanced versions of the SM-3, offer a more flexible, capable, and cost-effective architecture. Improved sensor technologies offer a variety of options to detect and track enemy missiles.

The SM-3/Aegis system was always both more cost effective and more effective as a defense, but it didn't clear the same path to space-based weapons systems like "Brilliant Pebbles" if it was to be the only missile defense system. The neocons wanted the Bush interceptor system precisely because it cleared the way for further escalation, not because it worked.

Nor is this the betrayal of the Czechs and Poles that the neocon Right wish to now paint it as. A plurality of both nations' people have been consistently opposed to the wishes of their governments on the scheme.

contrary to their hyperventilating about Obama selling out our allies, all this does is finally bring U.S. policy in line with where public opinion has been in both Poland and the Czech Republic for quite some time. In fact, earlier in the year opposition to the deployment of an American missile defense system caused the Czech government to fall. It's not selling out our allies when we're doing what they want.

Those governments have worried about Russia (not Iran) and are now insisting that the U.S. carry through on its previous promises of air-defense aid. That, and the economic impact of US bases, were always what they were concerned with. These concerns can be addressed without adding a destabilizing and untried missile defense system into the mix. NATO and the rest of Europe will be relieved too.

When it was first negotiating missile defense in Europe, the Bush administration spoke directly with the Czech and Polish governments but ignored other allies, triggering consternation throughout Europe and disrupting the NATO alliance. As the NATO Secretary General stated critically, �NATO is the right place to have this discussion on missile defense.� Morever, French President Nicolas Sarkozy on November 14 [2008] announced his opposition to U.S. missile defense in Europe.

And finally, the neocons lost the debate about this missile defense system because it didn't work at all and was ostensibly aimed at an entirely hypothetical threat.

The time it would take Iran to have a roughly 2000 km range ballistic missile armed with a nuclear warhead is determined by the time it would take Iran to build a nuclear warhead that is sufficiently light and compact to fly on a ballistic missile. Assuming Iran does not have clandestine enrichment capabilities, it would take Iran about six years to produce such a weapon � starting from the time they expel the International Atomic Energy Agency from their currently monitored nuclear enrichment facilities.

But even now, Iran hasn't even begun the development of such a warhead.

The U.S. intelligence community is reporting to the White House that Iran has not restarted its nuclear-weapons development program, two counterproliferation officials tell NEWSWEEK. U.S. agencies had previously said that Tehran halted the program in 2003.

The officials, who asked for anonymity when discussing sensitive information, said that U.S. intelligence agencies have informed policymakers at the White House and other agencies that the status of Iranian work on development and production of a nuclear bomb has not changed since the formal National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's "Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities" in November 2007. Public portions of that report stated that U.S. intelligence agencies had "high confidence" that, as of early 2003, Iranian military units were pursuing development of a nuclear bomb, but that in the fall of that year Iran "halted its nuclear weapons program." The document said that while U.S. agencies believed the Iranian government "at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons," U.S. intelligence as of mid-2007 still had "moderate confidence" that it had not restarted weapons-development efforts.

One of the two officials said that the Obama administration has now worked out a system in which intelligence agencies provide top policymakers, including the president, with regular updates on intelligence judgments like the conclusions in the 2007 Iran NIE. According to the two officials, the latest update to policymakers has been that as of now�two years after the period covered by the 2007 NIE�U.S. intelligence agencies still believe Iran has not resumed nuclear-weapons development work.

And thus the neocon Star Wars dream dies again. Maybe this time it will stay dead, but I doubt it.

Update: Even on the Right, the neocons are yelling loud but largely alone. Tom Nichols, Professor of National Security Affairs and a former chairman of the Strategy Department at the U.S. Naval War College, writes today at NRO:

Despite the outcry that President Obama has sold out the Europeans and caved to the Russians by cancelling missile defenses in Europe, it was the right thing to do. Those defenses were not going to work (or work well enough or soon enough to matter in any major crisis with Iran), and the diplomatic price we were paying for them was far out of proportion to any small gains we might have made by annoying the Russians or reassuring the Czechs and the Poles.

That's an assessment the Joint Chiefs agreed with too. The NRO editors (and Mitt Romney), not exactly renowned as always-right military minds, don't agree of course.

Update 2: Carl Levin has confirmed that the Poles don't lose their air defense deal, which was their main fear. Levin also believes the new Obama tack might encourage US/Russian co-operation on missile defense.