ABM aiming for Romania

[Sea Skimmer]

Romania 'to host missile shield'

Romania has agreed to host missile interceptors as part of a new US defence shield, its president says.

President Traian Basescu said the plan was approved by the defence council. It still needs parliamentary approval.

The US scrapped a previous missile shield, based in Poland and the Czech Republic, which had infuriated Russia.

Instead the new system would provide better defence from "the emerging threat" of Iranian short- and medium-range missiles, a US official said.

Mr Basescu said the system would "protect the whole of Romania's territory", but stressed that it "is not directed against Russia".

He said Romania will host "ground capabilities to intercept missiles" that would be operational by 2015 if approved by parliament.

Smaller system

In the US, state department spokesman PJ Crowley also stressed that the new system was "not a capability that is directed at Russia".

Romania has agreed to host anti-ballistic missile interceptors as part of the administration's "new missile defence plan... to protect US forward-deployed troops and our NATO allies against current and emerging ballistic missile threats from Iran," he said.

Mr Obama's decision to abandon the original plan in September was greeted with enthusiasm in Russia, and came amid attempts to "reset" the relationship between Washington and Moscow.

The anti-ballistic missile shield favoured by former President George W Bush would be replaced by a reconfigured system designed to shoot down short- and medium-range missiles, Mr Obama announced.

He said intelligence suggested Iran was concentrating on shorter-range, not intercontinental, missiles.

The Bush administration plans had infuriated Russia, which threatened to train nuclear warheads on Poland the Czech Republic in response.

The new system is built around ship- and land-based SM-3 missile interceptors.

In October, US Vice-President Joseph Biden visited Poland, Romania and the Czech Republic seeking support for the new system.

Poland has already signed up.
Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/e ... 498504.stm

Published: 2010/02/04 22:47:05 GMT

© BBC MMX

[Tanasinn]

Saw this on BBC's site earlier myself. There's not much of interest to it until we hear the Russian reaction.

I'm generally in favor of these missile shields - anything that reduces the odds of "Oops!" can't be that bad.

[K. A. Pital]

Cue placing Iskanders in the unrecognized (soon to be recognized, mwahaha!!!) Republic of Transnistria. What now?

[Sea Skimmer]

We don’t give a shit? The AN/TPY-2 radar which will control land based SM-3 can also directly control THAAD, it was designed for that first, removing the need to even deploy a separate Patriot radar for local ABM defense. We can also move the complete system around unlike GBI componets. But keep up the dreams.

[K. A. Pital]

But keep up the dreams.

What dreams? It was a joke.

[Guardsman Bass]

But keep up the dreams.

What dreams? It was a joke.

Really? Too bad .. . for Transnistria. They could always use anything that brings more spending there.

[Chris OFarrell]

Yeah, Russia is going to be pissed. Probably scream that Obama betrayed them or something...

The problem is, as far as I understand it, once the long range sensors, command and control links and other critical infrastructure is in place and operational, changing/upgrading the system from SM3 to GBI, is really quite an easy thing to do.

Althoguh I don't think GBI can even really hit an ICBM on a trajectory towards the US from an Eastern European base, though I could be wrong.

[K. A. Pital]

It can complicate the destruction of NATO command objects in Europe, anyhow.

[Stark]

We don’t give a shit? The AN/TPY-2 radar which will control land based SM-3 can also directly control THAAD, it was designed for that first, removing the need to even deploy a separate Patriot radar for local ABM defense. We can also move the complete system around unlike GBI componets. But keep up the dreams.

Dreams of being safe from US nuclear annihilation = bad!

If the intent is to protect the US, where else do bases need to be built? I guess it's unlikely incoming missiles are going to pass over the southern hemisphere.

[adam_grif]

It'd be nice if Russia and the United States co-developed an ABM together. The countries would both have the codes to shut it down, so MAD is preserved, but we still get protection from rogue launches/states.

[K. A. Pital]

If the intent is to protect the US, where else do bases need to be built?

Everywhere! Or, rather, the more - the better. After all, if there is a reduction in the bases, that can lead to a base gap. We cannot allow a foreign base gap! *laughs*

Being serious though, the ABM system is quite a long time from deployment, and perspectives for it being placed in Romania are no more real than the perspectives for placing it in wherever they wanted to in the first place, which vanished in thin air after Obama cancelled it.

[Stark]

It'd be nice if Russia and the United States co-developed an ABM together. The countries would both have the codes to shut it down, so MAD is preserved, but we still get protection from rogue launches/states.

I think there's a little too much fear and way too much nationalist dick stroking on both sides for that to happen.

[adam_grif]

It'd be nice if Russia and the United States co-developed an ABM together. The countries would both have the codes to shut it down, so MAD is preserved, but we still get protection from rogue launches/states.

I think there's a little too much fear and way too much nationalist dick stroking on both sides for that to happen.

I said it would be nice, not it would be probable

[TimothyC]

It'd be nice if Russia and the United States co-developed an ABM together. The countries would both have the codes to shut it down, so MAD is preserved, but we still get protection from rogue launches/states.

I'm sorry, but like hell I want the US to be at the mercy of the Russians.

Besides, what is to stop the Russians from filling out the system they already have?

[adam_grif]

It'd be nice if Russia and the United States co-developed an ABM together. The countries would both have the codes to shut it down, so MAD is preserved, but we still get protection from rogue launches/states.

I'm sorry, but like hell I want the US to be at the mercy of the Russians.

Besides, what is to stop the Russians from filling out the system they already have?

Well since they both have sizable nuclear arsenals already and can't really eliminate the other's arsenal with a preemptive strike, they're already "at the mercy of the Russians", if that's what you meant by the statement. The reason it would be beneficial to cooperate in a system like this is that by giving the keys to the system to both parties, you guarantee that Mutually Assured Destruction will be preserved (and thus that neither party is putting the system in place so that they can attack the other without fear of retaliation, which is one of the fears associated with your enemies neutralizing your arsenal), reduce the impact of another arms race (if one side believes its arsenal is in danger of being made irrelevant, they will spend time and money on countermeasures and expanding the arsenal to overwhelm the defenses), but still provide piece of mind from Rogue nuclear states like North Korea or (potentially) Iran. There's the added benefit of being safe from rogue launches (regardless of how unlikely that is).

The US is always claiming that its missile shields are not intended to be a shield against the Russians, but rather against third parties. You can understand why they might be nervous about a system that could potentially (one day in the future) make their Nuclear Arsenal irrelevant. The cooperation would be a sign of goodwill from both parties.

[Sea Skimmer]

I'm sorry, but like hell I want the US to be at the mercy of the Russians.

Besides, what is to stop the Russians from filling out the system they already have?

Nothing. But they’d rather spend the money on brand new ICBMs and ballistic missile subs to keep the whole balance of terror thing going.

[K. A. Pital]

Nothing.

Filling by what? The 51T6s are taken off-line as I gather, and we have no current working exoatmospheric interceptor with capacities similar to the US ones. Or? Building 45 ton high-performance interceptors doesn't look like it's much cheaper than churning out Topols, and I have not seen an evidence of a more efficient and advanced interceptor.