NATO’s Missile Defense – Realigning Collective Defense for the 21st Century

Year 2012, Volume: 17 Issue: 1, 37 - 54, 01.05.2012

Sean Kay

Abstract

This article examines the rationale and implications of NATO’s missile defense program which was an appropriate, but problemmatic, response to collective defense requirements. By designing a theater-based missile defense in southeastern Europe, the United States has returned the question of credible collective defense back to NATO. The discussion provides a survey of the missile defense debates in NATO and the evolution of the concept under President Barack Obama. It then examines the challenge of constructively engaging Russia in the dynamics of NATO’s missile defense decisions and deployments. The analysis concludes with an overview of what this re-prioritization of collective defense in means for realigning America’s role in NATO

Keywords

Missile defense, NATO, Iran, Turkey, Russia, containment, collective defense, alliances.

References

• Joseph Lepgold, “NATO’s Post-Cold War Collective Action Problem”, International Security, Vol. 23 No.1 (Summer 1998), p. 88.
• See Sean Kay, “NATO, the Kosovo War and Neoliberal Theory”, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol. 25 No.2 (August 2004), pp.252-279.
• Thom Shanker and Nicholas Kulish, “Russia Lashes out on Missile Deal”, New York Times, 15 August 2008.
• “NATO Deadlocked over Turkey’s Defense in Possible Iraq War”, Voice of America, 10 February 2003.
• Sean Kay, Global Security in the Twenty-first Century: The Quest for Power and the Search for Peace, 2nd edition Lanham: MD, Rowman and Littlefield, 2011.
• Joseph Cirincione, “The Declining Ballistic Missile Threat”, United States House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, 5 March 2008.
• See International Atomic Energy Agency, “Report to the Director General”, 18 November 2011, at http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Documents/Board/2011/gov2011-65.pdf [last visited 11 January 2012].
• Nuclear Threat Reduction Initiative, “Iran Profile”, at www.nti.org/e_research/profiles/Iran/Missile/ index.html [last visited 11 January 2012].
• Ze’ev Schiff, “New Iranian Missiles Put Europe in Firing Range”, Haaretz, 27 April 2007.
• Victor A. Utgoff, “Missile Defense and American Ambitions”, Survival, Vol. 44, No. 2 (Summer 2002), pp.85-102.
• Philip Coyle and Victoria Samson, “Missile Defense Malfunction: Why the Proposed U.S. Missile Defenses in Europe Will Not Work”, Ethics and International Affairs, Vol. 22, No. 1 (Spring 2008).
• See Scott D. Sagan and Kenneth N. Waltz, The Spread of Nuclear Weapons: A Debate Renewed ,New York, W.W. Norton, 2002; Dennis M. Gormley, “Missile Contagion”, Survival, Vol. 50, No. 4 (August- September 2008), pp.137-154.
• Anthony Seaboyer and Oliver Thranert, “What Missile Proliferation Means for Europe”, Survival, Vol. 8, No. 2 (Summer 2006), pp. 86-87.
• See Victoria Samson, “Flight Tests for Ground-Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) System”, at www.cdi. org/pdfs/GMD%20IFT3.pdf [last visited 13 January 2012].
• Daliea Dassa Kaye and Frederic M. Wehrey, “A Nuclear Iran: The Reactions of Neighbours”, Survival, Vol. 49, No. 2 (Summer 2007), p. 114.
• U.S. Department of Defense, “European GMD Mission Test Concept”, 1 October 2007, at http:// www.cdi.org/pdfs/EuropeanGMD.pdf [last visited 20 December 2011].
• Based on discussions with senior US officials, off-the-record, Summer 2009.
• Lt. General Robert G. Gard Jr. (USA, ret.), “National Missile Defense in Europe: Premature and Unwise”, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, July 2007, at http://www.armscontrolcenter. org/policy/missiledefense/articles/european_missile-defense-premature/ [last visited 22 January 2012].
• See Richard Weitz, “US: Russia’s Missile Defense Fears Driven by more than Security”, Eurasia Insight, 6 March 2007.
• Liam Stack, “Russia Threatens to Suspend NATO Cooperation”, Christian Science Monitor, 22 August 2008.
• Hary de Quetteveille, “Russian Oil Supplies to Czech Republic Cut after Missile Defence Deal with U.S.”, Daily Telegraph (London), 19 July 2008.
• Joris Janssen Lok, “NATO Struggles with Missile Defense”, Aviation Week, 10 July 2007, at http:// www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/aw061107p2.xml [last visited 11 January 2012].
• North Atlantic Treaty Organization, Briefing: Weapons of Mass Destruction, at http://www.nato.int [last visited 10 January 2012].
• “Press Briefing by the NATO Spokesman James Appathurai, and Technical Briefing on Defense Against Terrorism and Missile Defense by NATO Assistant Secretary General for Defense Investment, Peter Flory”, 12 March 2008, at http://www.nato.int [last visited 10 November 2008].
• Barcin Yinanc, “Turkey’s Position on US Missile Defense Program”, Turkish Daily News, 14 March 2007.
• Kingston Reif, “Russia Looms over U.S.-Poland Missile Defense Agreement”, Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, 20 August 2008, at http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/policy/missiledefense articles/082008_russia_looms_us-poland_missile_defense/ [last visited 25 November 2008].
• Robert G. Bell, “Addressing NATO’s Missile Defense Challenges”, Remarks to the NPA Science and Technology Committee, 29 May 2004, at http://transatlantic.sais-jhu.edu/PDF/speeches/bellspeech. pdf [last visited 25 November 2008].
• See Sally McNamara and Sean Kay, “Debate on European Missile Defense”, Politico.com, (July 2009).
• Steve Erlanger, “NATO Chief Defends Opening to Russia”, New York Times, 4 December 2008.
• Julian Hale, “French DM Casts Doubt on Need for Missile Defense”, Defense News, 2 December 2008.
• Peter Baker, “Obama Offered Deal to Russia in Secret Letter”, New York Times, 3 March 2009.
• Based on off-the-record conversation with senior White House/National Security Council official, Summer 2009.
• “Strasbourg/Kehl Summit Declaration”, North Atlantic Treaty Organization, 4 April 2009.
• For full detail see The White House, “Fact Sheet: Implementing Missile Defense in Europe”, at http:// www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/15/fact-sheet-implementing-missile-defense-europe [last visited 12 January 2012].
• Vice-Admiral Lowell E. Jacoby, U.S. Navy Director, “Defense Intelligence Agency Statement for the Record”, U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, 17 March 2005. By 2012, these estimates were mainly steady though reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency would suggest an acceleration of Iranian nuclear timelines.
• Selcan Hacaoglu, “Turkey Joins NATO’s Missile Defense Shield”, Associated Press, 14 September 2011.
• “NATO Won’t Cite Iran in Missile Defense Plan”, distributed by Global Security Newswire, at http:// www.nti.org/gsn/article/nato-wont-cite-iran-in-missile-defense-plan/ [last visited 15 January 2012].
• “Iran Warns Turkey Against Deploying NATO Missile Defense System”, at http://www.haaretz.com/ news/middle-east/iran-warns-turkey-against-deploying-nato-missile-defense-system-1.383241 [last visited 10 November 2011].
• “NATO, Russia Still Deadlocked on Missile Defense; Russia Warns Time Running Out”, Associated Press, 8 December 2011.
• Arms Control Association, “Missile Defense Cooperation Stalls”, at www.armscontrol.org/print/4952 [last visited 18 January 2012].
• Off-the-record briefing with senior official from US Department of State, Council on Foreign Relations, April 2008, Washington, D.C.
• Thom Shanker and David M. Herszenhorn, “U.S. Official Says Missile-Defense Shield Will Move Forward”, New York Times, 3 December 2011.
• Arms Control Association, “Missile Defense Cooperation Stalls”.
• George N. Lewis and Theodore A. Postol, “European Missile Defense: The Technological Basis of Russian Concerns”, Arms Control Association, 2007, at www.armscontrol.org [last visited 29 November 2008].
• This approach of plans moving faster than actual technology is referred to in the United States as “spiral development” which includes deployment of existing capabilities before their effectiveness is proven. This approach builds in an assumption of eventual success – even if there is reason to think that assumption might be flawed. See Victoria Samson and Nick Schwellenbach, “Spiraling Out of Control: How Missile Defense’s Acquisition Strategy is Setting a Dangerous Precedent”, Defense and Security Analysis, Vol. 24, No. 2 (June 2008), pp. 2003-2011.
• Arms Control Associate, “Missile Defense Cooperation Stalls”.
• Will Englund and William Wan, “Medvedev Threatens to Target U.S. Missile Shield in Europe if no Deal is Reached”, Washington Post, 23 November 2011.
• Theodore Postol and Yousef Butt, “Upsetting the Reset”, available at http://www.fas.org/pubs/_ docs/2011%20Missile%20Defense%20Report.pdf [last visited 15 January 2012].
• Postol and Butt, “Upsetting the Reset”.
• “U.S. Senators Warn Obama on Missile Shield Moves”, Defense News, 14 April 2011.
• “Russia Says Time Short in Missile Standoff”, Reuters, 8 December 2011.
• Richard Weitz, “Illusive Visions and Practical Realities: Russia, NATO and Missile Defense”, Survival, Vol. 52, No. 4 (August-September 2010), pp.99-120.
• Weitz, “Illusive Visions and Practical Realities”, p. 101. 54 Ibid., p. 108.
• See Barry Posen, “We Can Live with a Nuclear Iran”, New York Times, 27 February 2006.
• See Scott Sagan, “Why Do States Build Nuclear Weapons?: Three Models in Search of a Bomb”, International Security, Vol. 21, No. 3 (Winter 1996-97), pp.54-87.
• “Former Senator Sam Nunn, Co-Chairman of the Nuclear Threat Initiative”, Spaso House Discussion Forum, Moscow, 27 August 2007, at www.nti.org/c_press/speech_samnunn_spaso082707.pdf. [last visited 10 December 2011].
• See Greg Jaffe, “Obama Plans a Leaner, Cheaper Military”, Washington Post, 5 January 2012.