missile defenses-both theater and homeland-as directed against its strategic forces and as a capability that could rapidly advance, thereby eroding Russian confidence in its nuclear deterrent. homeland missile defense system has altered the strategic balance. homeland missile defense system as a justification for its substantial and continuing weapon modernization program, neither Russian force modernization nor the limited U.S. While Russia has used the existence of a U.S. The broader proliferation of long-range missiles anticipated in the late 1990s has not materialized. While North Korea has continued its long-range missile developments and achieved an intercontinental capability, Iran has not yet reached this threshold. This includes both rogue states and major power rivals whose long-range missile programs predated the deployment of U.S. Potential adversaries continue to develop long-range ballistic missiles despite deployment of a U.S. The GMD system also serves as a hedge against Iranian breakout. willingness in time of crisis and war to run the risks of protecting them. Its allies would have been more concerned about U.S. In the absence of such a defensive capability, the United States would likely have been more heavily exposed to North Korean actions, would have operated at a much higher-risk posture, and would have had less negotiating room with which to navigate coercive tactics and crises.
While this system has never been tested in combat, it appears thus far to have effectively paced North Korea’s development and deployment of intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).
homeland against a limited but evolving rogue-state missile threat. The primary benefit of the Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system is the protection it provides the U.S. diplomatic activities in peacetime and crisis. Deterring attacks against the United States, its allies, and partners. homeland, forces abroad, allies, and partners. As such, missile defense supports key national defense policy objectives. and allied interests abroad and to counter limited threats to the U.S. Since withdrawing, the United States has sought to develop and deploy a layered missile defense system to defend against regional threats to U.S.
Almost a half-century has elapsed since the United more » States and the Soviet Union signed the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, and almost two decades since the former withdrew. In accordance with the statutory language, this study considers whether the security benefits obtained by deployment of homeland missile defenses of the United States are undermined or counterbalanced by adverse reactions of potential adversaries, and considers the effectiveness of homeland missile defense efforts of the United States to deter the development of ballistic missiles. The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) for Policy requested that Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory conduct a Congressionally directed study on homeland missile defense, pursuant to Section 1692 of the fiscal year 2020 National Defense Authorization Act.
0 kommentar(er)
