Missile Defence

Missile defence systems are emerging as technologies that could change the nuclear deterrence calculus. Theoretically, this system engages the incoming ballistic mis­sile before it reaches the target. Ballistic missiles usually have a ballistic trajectory over most of its flight path. The missile (with payload) traverses a path through the upper atmosphere or into the space. Missile defence architecture is expected to destroy this ballistic missile much before it reaches the target. The major part of this system involves interceptors and radars. The interceptors usually engage the target in the re-entry phase.[180] The fundamental aim of missile defence system is to hit the target into the outer space. This challenges the global norms of keeping the space free from any military intervention. The space security policies which many states in the world are keen to develop are about preventing the weaponisation of space, and missile defence systems actually challenge this notion.

It is important to appreciate that missile defence is much beyond undertaking space launches to demonstrate the missile advancements made by the state. It amounts to the weaponisation of outer space (if the engagement of incoming missiles is done in space[181]). This technology also demonstrates (in a limited way) the ASAT capabilities of the state.

Origins of the concept of missile defence could be traced back to conceptu­alisation of Star Wars (Strategic Defence Initiative-SDI) programme by the then US President Roland Ragan in 1983. Over the years, the nomenclature of missile defence idea has witnessed certain changes mostly based on its categorisation. However, at places, names like national missile defence (NMD), theatre missile defence (TMD), ground-based midcourse defence (GMD) and strategic missile defence are found being used interchangeably.

Missile defence has been a top priority for various successive US adminis – trations.[182] Apart from the existing radar and interceptor structure, the USA is also working on futuristic technologies like the space-based lasers and kinetic kill (so-called hit-to-kill) vehicles for intercepting enemy missiles in their ‘boost-phase’, immediately after the launch.[183] The USA is aware that any treaty mechanism related

to space would curtail their freedom in space. This fear lead them to discredit the very own agreement signed by them few years back. The anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty (a bilateral agreement signed amongst the USA and erstwhile USSR in 1972) was always under threat because it was challenging the concept of ASAT. Missile interceptors threatened to erode the ABM treaty regime because of the similarities in ASAT and missile defence technologies [17]. During June 2002, the USA did the unilateral withdrawal from the ABM treaty, an act carried out to protect the US interests in the arena of missile defence. Over the years, the USA has been unwilling to be a part of any bilateral or multilateral arms control or disarmament mechanism which could limit their options both from missile defence and ASAT angle.

In missile defence, context most important Asian angle is the US notion of perceived threat from Iran. Israel also considers missile defence system as necessity in view of the threat from Iran. Israel has successfully tested its Arrow system by doing intercepts of a ballistic target missile.[184] India has also conducted a successful ballistic missile defence test during March 2011 (so far India has conducted six tests out of which four were successful). Indian ballistic missile defence programme involves of long-range tracking radar, command and control system and the interceptor.[185] It is implicit that for the purposes of nuclear dominance in the region and for achieving technological edge over the adversary, nuclear – capable states from the region would opt for missile defence systems. Also, states like India (and even China) which has a no-flrst-use policy (NFU) could justify investments into missile defence as a necessity to absorb the first strike.

China has been conducting on-and-off research into missile defence systems since the 1960s; however, it appears that they are increasing their emphasis now. On Jan 11, 2011, China had announced that it had successfully tested a land-based missile defence system. This test made China the only country after the USA to use a missile to destroy another in space. During the same period, the US agencies had also detected that two missiles had collided outside the Earth’s atmosphere. China’s investments in this arena basically emerge out of their Taiwan fears. They have concerns about the US sale of advanced Patriot missile defence systems to Taiwan.[186] On the other hand, they also understand that the USA will take the implicit message that such technology also could be modified to be used to attack the US space assets.

Probably, India is also looking at developing its ASAT architecture as a part of missile defence programme. India could develop their high-altitude interceptors into ASAT to damage low orbit satellites [18]. India’s future plans in regard to missile defence and ASAT capabilities were highlighted by Mr V K Saraswat, director general of India’s Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO) at the sidelines of 97th Indian Science Congress (2010).

In regard to Pakistan, it has been reported that the state may seek the help from China and could get the interceptor missile defence system by 2012. Pakistan is particularly looking to purchase a high-altitude missile air defence system. China could part with HQ-9/FD2000 system developed by the China Academy of Defence Technology. This system is claimed to be capable of hitting aircraft out to 125 km, air-launched cruise missiles out to 50 km and ballistic missiles out to 25 km— representing ABM capability equivalent to the Indian AAD and American PAC-3.[187]

Japan has been following a pacifist security policy post-World War II. However, their engagement with the USA to provide a missile defence cover to their state brings out the assertive aspect of this security policy. The US-Japanese cooperation in this field dates back to the 1980s since the period of Reagan initiative on SDI. But, Japan’s participation was more symbolic in nature then. The actual security efficacy of this system emerged to them after the Aug 1998 testing of Taepodong-1 ballistic missile by North Korea. The North Korean interests in developing nuclear weapons and their withdrawal from NPT in 2003 also made Japan more cautious. By end of 2003, Japanese cabinet took decision to introduce missile defence system as a part of its security architecture. It was argued that ‘BMD system is the only and purely defensive measure, without alternatives, to protect life and property of the citizens of Japan against ballistic missile attacks, and meets the principle of exclusively defence-oriented national defence policy’.[188] Presently, Japan has deployed a multilayered missile defence system having sea-based midcourse missile defence (the Aegis ballistic missile defence system) and ground-based terminal phase missile defence (Patriot Advanced Capabilities-3, or PAC-3) [19].