What is the future role of missile defense in the United States, and how does it affect the globe as a whole? These questions where examined in late June at a luncheon on Capitol Hill hosted by The Independent Working Group (IWG) on Missile Defense and the Space Relationship.
Although many may believe keeping an active missile defense system active in the United States seems is a relic from the Cold War, it nevertheless remains a crucial part of Homeland Security. Currently the Eastern Seaboard is being protected by two ground-based midcourse defense systems (GMD), and debates are occurring on whether to build a third GMD site to further protect the East Coast.
Vice Admiral J.D. Williams (USN, Ret.), former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Naval Warfare, stated, “Even though this system is remarkable, it’s still not all it can be. […] When you depend on only one thing, you’re already in trouble.”
Jeff Kueter, President of the George C. Marshall Institute, added to Williams’ statements, explaining the need to add a missile defense system in space. He explained that the U.S.’s current GMD system is good, but along with being poorly funded, does not provide adequate protection. “Why is it important for us to go to space with our missile defense system?” Kueter asked, “Because it is essential.”
As the budget cuts caused by the sequester are implemented, the Department of Homeland Security and subsequently the missile defense systems will receive drastically less funding. Baker Spring, F.M. Kirby Research Fellow in National Security Policy at the Heritage Foundation, explained, “The budget cuts to the missile defense system could be dramatic,” thereby weakening the U.S.’s ability to protect itself or it allies.
In light of the cuts, Kueter explained the brilliance of taking the missile defense system to space. Having a mobile satellite system would be more cost effective, and would better equip the nation to defend against any missile attack in any stage of its launch. “What we can, and should, do in order to complement the existing architecture in the existing concept of our missile defense, is create a concentrated amount of missile satellites that can be moved to the areas of greatest threat.”
Whether the missile defense system will be upgraded or downgraded is anyone’s guess. There are a few certainties that should be considered however: protests are erupting around the globe, U.S. relations with Russia are degrading, and North Korea and Iran are both becoming more prominent threats. World peace will always be a hope and a possibility in the future, but until then it would be foolish for the U.S. to not protect itself or its allies.
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Mathew J. Diendorf/Released
a global affairs media network
U.S. Missile Defense Systems Examined
July 16, 2013
What is the future role of missile defense in the United States, and how does it affect the globe as a whole? These questions where examined in late June at a luncheon on Capitol Hill hosted by The Independent Working Group (IWG) on Missile Defense and the Space Relationship.
Although many may believe keeping an active missile defense system active in the United States seems is a relic from the Cold War, it nevertheless remains a crucial part of Homeland Security. Currently the Eastern Seaboard is being protected by two ground-based midcourse defense systems (GMD), and debates are occurring on whether to build a third GMD site to further protect the East Coast.
Vice Admiral J.D. Williams (USN, Ret.), former Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for Naval Warfare, stated, “Even though this system is remarkable, it’s still not all it can be. […] When you depend on only one thing, you’re already in trouble.”
Jeff Kueter, President of the George C. Marshall Institute, added to Williams’ statements, explaining the need to add a missile defense system in space. He explained that the U.S.’s current GMD system is good, but along with being poorly funded, does not provide adequate protection. “Why is it important for us to go to space with our missile defense system?” Kueter asked, “Because it is essential.”
As the budget cuts caused by the sequester are implemented, the Department of Homeland Security and subsequently the missile defense systems will receive drastically less funding. Baker Spring, F.M. Kirby Research Fellow in National Security Policy at the Heritage Foundation, explained, “The budget cuts to the missile defense system could be dramatic,” thereby weakening the U.S.’s ability to protect itself or it allies.
In light of the cuts, Kueter explained the brilliance of taking the missile defense system to space. Having a mobile satellite system would be more cost effective, and would better equip the nation to defend against any missile attack in any stage of its launch. “What we can, and should, do in order to complement the existing architecture in the existing concept of our missile defense, is create a concentrated amount of missile satellites that can be moved to the areas of greatest threat.”
Whether the missile defense system will be upgraded or downgraded is anyone’s guess. There are a few certainties that should be considered however: protests are erupting around the globe, U.S. relations with Russia are degrading, and North Korea and Iran are both becoming more prominent threats. World peace will always be a hope and a possibility in the future, but until then it would be foolish for the U.S. to not protect itself or its allies.
U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Mathew J. Diendorf/Released
