Mystery Anti-Ballistic Missile

(«Al Jazeera», Арабская пресса)

 

The Cold War ended two decades ago, but the dream of Ronald Reagan once called the Soviet Union an "evil empire" of the impenetrable anti-missile shield once again beginning to influence American program in the field of national security.

Wednesday evening, the U.S. tested new missile interceptors, spending 100 million dollars on something to start with the Pacific Marshall Islands missile in the direction of California.

Missile defense system in the end did not work: stage race, which was supposed to shoot down a missile from the sky, flew past the goal, and a long list of unsuccessful test of a costly defense project, gained another point.

After the Cold War, America has spent on anti-missile system "of approximately $ 100 billion, told Al Jazeera spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency, Richard Lehner (Richard Lehner).

Unsuccessful test last Wednesday was particularly important because it implies an attempt to intercept warheads instead of conventional training exercises to attempt to send a rocket to a certain point, says Ian Anthony (Ian Anthony), Research Coordinator of the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute).

Big Money

Despite constant technological problems associated with the system, the White House has requested for the next (2011) fiscal year 9.9 billion dollars on missile defense programs, told Al Jazeera Anthony.

Professor of Science and International Security at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Theodore Postol (Theodore Postol), former science adviser Chief of Staff, U.S. Navy, these costs do not like. Arms expert, which can hardly be called a liberal prekrasnodushnym simply does not believe that missile-defense project is technically feasible.

"If we consider this idea in engineering or the defense perspective, it appears that it is meaningless," - said Postol Al Jazeera.

Even leaving aside the technological problems and the high financial cost, if Barack Obama serious about reducing the likelihood of nuclear war, then develop a new missile system - this is clearly not the best way to strengthen international confidence.

"The United States like to call defense exclusively defensive system - says professor of international relations, University of Antwerp Belgian Tom Sauer (Tom Sauer). - The problem is that Russian or Chinese, it might seem threatening or aggressive. In such matters, it all depends on the point of view. "

Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, former KGB officer, is well versed in the history of the Cold War, believes that the U.S. plans to build in Eastern Europe "missile shield" reminiscent of the Caribbean crisis in 1962, during which the world is on the brink of nuclear war.

"The Bush administration planned to place a radar station in the Czech Republic and in Poland - missile interceptors," - says Dr. Sauer. Obama has not turned missile program for Eastern Europe, but only slightly modify it.

"We plan to deploy in Poland and Romania ground missile SM-3 (a modification of missiles, surface-to-air missiles) to protect Europe from ballistic missiles, small and medium-range" - Spokesman for the Missile Defense Agency Lehner.

Washington "hawks"  

However, despite the plans of U.S. and NATO to create a "shield" in the former Soviet bloc countries, the hawks of Washington defense circles do not look happy.

"The Obama administration pursues a policy of restarting relations with Russia. As far as I can see now it looks completely one-sided and favorable for Russia ", - said a security expert at the conservative Heritage Foundation Baker Spring (Baker Spring).

U.S. and Russia agreed to conclude a new treaty on reducing nuclear weapons, called START, which limits the arsenals of the former Cold War adversaries at the level of 1,550 warheads and 700 delivery vehicles on each side. This is enough to destroy the world several times.

Some senators are Republicans, including Senator from Wyoming, John Barrass (John Barrasso), believe that this contract may prevent the United States to implement plans for missile defense, and plan to vote against him.

However, the blame for the arms build-up program on the "hawks" from the GOP it would be historically inaccurate. For example, the Democratic administration of Bill Clinton proposed a project for placing 1,000 interceptor missiles in space as part of its Strategic Defense Initiative, which critics called "Star Wars".

"We believe that the program Obama administration should it include in itself," - said Spring told Al Jazeera.

In response to a question about the ideas of Heritage Foundation Postol just laughed, calling the expert fund "ideologues" who do not understand the scientific basis of the defense programs they support.

"Disappointment in Obama"

However, the MIT professor and former adviser to the Chief of Naval Staff criticizes not only the Heritage Foundation, and Obama.

"The Obama administration makes false statements about the technical capabilities of missile defense, exactly as they did before it, the Bush administration. As a person who supports Obama, I am very disappointed, "- says Postol.

Of course, Lehner of the Missile Defense Agency says the program is technically successful, despite the failed the test on Wednesday.

"In general, since in 2001 was deployed BMDS (defense system against ballistic missiles, developed by Boeing), we have had 46 successful steals on 58 attempts," - he says.

 

However, according to Postol themselves these tests, "in fact, a fake, as if their results are consistent with the" minimum standards ", they are already considered successful. 

There are different types of systems are designed to reflect missiles small, medium and long range. At the core lies the idea of missile defense to beat bullet bullet - either at the surface, as in the case of complexes of the Patriot used in 1991 during the Gulf War, or high in the atmosphere or in space, in which the fly intercontinental ballistic missiles.

"The problem is that systems operating at high altitudes, are vulnerable to simple countermeasures - says Postol. According to him, a simple, cheap and effective way to fool the missile defense - a balloon or a false target. "No one and it was able to explain to me why this should not worry" - he adds.

"Military-Industrial Complex"

North Korea and Iran, countries which the U.S. link to justify the establishment of missile defense, could easily resort to such countermeasures that make complex technologies useless, says Sauer, a specialist in international relations.

But if these technologies do not work, then what is behind the missile defense program?

Postol said that the case Domestically, political issues and a desire to appease the Europeans to America. Republicans, he said, support the technology, though do not understand how it works, and the Democrats do not want to show weakness on national security matters.

NATO, meaningless existence since the Cold War, at its last summit in Lisbon today announced the establishment of missile defense as one of its new tasks.

Sauer said that the U.S. inter-party struggle, of course, plays a role, but for the expensive project is something more profound than the struggle between Republicans and Democrats. In the end, it was the Clinton administration revived the program, which after the Cold War, it was possible to simply forget.

The company Boeing, which gets most associated with missile defense orders, there is production in all fifty states. Therefore, if a bad project will be closed, in his defense, according to Sauer, made by local politicians, fearful of unemployment and loss of votes.

"A lot of congressmen who would like to see more funding for these programs are associated with the military-industrial complex" - says Sauer.

"In essence, this program is to create jobs in the United States."

 

o