As a businessman at heart, US President Donald Trump believes that large amounts of money are being spent on nuclear weapons. At the World Economic Forum, he suggested that negotiations with Russia and China should focus on denuclearisation and reducing nuclear arsenals.
However, the same president who wants to keep the US secure also announced plans for a national missile defence system, a bigger and more modern version of something like the Israeli Iron Dome.
So, is he advocating for two conflicting ideas? But that is what Trump is! It is difficult to comprehend exactly what he is thinking.
On February 6, two US Senators Dan Sullivan and Kevin Cramer, members of the Senate Armed Services Committee, introduced the Increasing Response Options and Deterrence of Missile Engagements (IRON DOME) Act, which aims to strengthen and expand the US missile defence system to protect the entire country.
It is important to recognise the nuances of this new idea presented by Trump.
Today, the US administration is keen to ensure that they will never be caught off guard by a (nuclear) missile threat to their homeland. Various provisions have been suggested in this IRON DOME Act and a major financial outlay has been presented. It looks like having a missile shield is going to be an extremely costly proposal.
This document presents the need for provisions like $12 billion to expand missile interceptor fields and have new Next Generation Interceptors. A sum of $1.4 billion for the ‘Terminal High Altitude Area Defence’ (THAAD) system and $1.5 billion for PAC-2 and PAC-3 munitions and MM-104 Patriot batteries is required.
There are some other areas for which significant monetary requirements are projected, including $900 million for research and development in space-based missile defence and $60 million to develop space-based satellite sensors.
The president on January 28 signed an executive order directing the Pentagon to develop a comprehensive missile defence system. The threat is expected to be in the form of possible attacks from ballistic, hypersonic and cruise missiles, along with other advanced aerial threats.
It appears that owing to Russian and Chinese advancements in the hypersonic field, the US security establishment is getting much more concerned.
The directive requires the Pentagon to submit a comprehensive plan within 60 days, outlining the capabilities needed for the next-generation missile defence system.
There looks to be a strong focus on space technologies for the development of this system. Specifically, the order calls for the development and deployment of space-based interceptors for boost-phase interception and an accelerated deployment of the Hypersonic and Ballistic Tracking Space Sensor layer.
For Trump, the idea of morality will never be attractive; what he is likely to focus on is the financial factor. File image courtesy X/@WhiteHouse.
What should be made of the order’s reference to the Cold War-era Strategic Defence Initiative?
The order specifically makes a mention of the plan proposed during the 1980s by then-President Ronald Reagan towards building an effective defence against nuclear attacks.
On March 23, 1983, in an address to the nation, Reagan had announced the need for pioneering research into a national defence system that could make nuclear weapons obsolete. This speech announced the Strategic Defence Initiative (SDI). The concept was also referred to as ‘Star Wars’, inspired by the popular film series telecasted then of the same name.
At its core, the SDI program aimed to develop a space-based missile defence system capable of protecting the US from a large-scale nuclear attack. The SDI led to the development of various technologies, but the exact idea conceptualised by Ragan could not become a reality.
Over a period, the US has developed systems like the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defence System, THAAD, ground-based interceptors, air defence systems and various aerial systems and short-range anti-ballistic missile systems.
Now, are we seeing the same vision in Trump as we did in Reagan? Reagan strongly believed that US defence research should focus on making nuclear weapons unnecessary, as he viewed them as immoral. For Trump, however, the idea of morality will never be attractive; what he is likely to focus on is the financial factor.
During the Cold War, some believed that a successful missile defence system could stop the Soviet Union from launching a first strike, which raised the question: if that is presumable, then why have nuclear weapons?
In today’s world, particularly for the US, it would be naive to ignore the challenges posed by nations like North Korea and Iran, as no simple solutions exist and there appears to be no alternative to nuclear weapons.
Hence, nothing much should be read about the mention of Regan’s SDI doctrine in the executive order signed by Trump.
US has concerns around hypersonic capabilities of Russia, China and maybe North Korea
The strategy of mutually assured destruction (MAD) was fully articulated in the early 1960s, primarily by the then-US defence secretary Robert McNamara. The idea behind MAD is that the threat of nuclear retaliation stops an enemy from using nuclear weapons. In this approach, a nuclear-armed defender would have such strong second-strike capabilities that any nuclear war would ultimately lead to complete annihilation on both sides.
Reagan never supported the MAD doctrine. Presently, even as it may not be with similar notions, Trump too must have realised MAD’s limitations.
In the ongoing Ukraine conflict, on March 19, 2022 Russia had fired hypersonic missiles (Kh-47 Kinzhal) on targets in Ukraine. This was the first time ever in history that hypersonic missiles were used in an actual war. Since then, on a few occasions, these missiles have been used by Russia on Ukrainian targets.
However, there are incidents when the Ukrainian forces had shot down Russian Kinzhal hypersonic missiles with a successful engagement by the Patriot Air Defence missile system.
So, if this is the case, then why is the US looking for a new missile defence system to address the hypersonic threat?
The Kh-47 Kinzhal is a hypersonic air-launched ballistic missile. The main types of hypersonic missiles include hypersonic glide vehicles (HGV) and hypersonic cruise missiles. Existing missile defence systems are not capable of addressing the HGV threat.
The Avangard (Yu-71 and Yu-74) is a Russian HGV that has been in service since 2019. It can carry a multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicle payload.
Obviously, the US needs next-generation missile defence systems as of yesterday! Recently, North Korea claimed that it has tested a missile that flew 12 times the speed of sound (a hypersonic missile is known to fly at speeds more than five times the speed of sound).
The US is expected to have major concerns about China too. During October 2019, China made a public display of its HGV called the DF-ZF (also known as DF-19 or WU-14).
More importantly, the US realises that in 2023, China established its fifth command, the Near-Space Command, which is the world’s first such structure. This command is responsible for military activities in the altitude zone above the Earth’s surface in the range of 20 to 100 km and will have full control over China’s hypersonic weapons, including those in the inventories of the other four branches of the military.
This indicates that China has great expectations from their hypersonic arsenal in any conflict situation.
Also read | Trump’s Arctic Ambition: Why Greenland is Crucial for US National Security and Space Warfare
Real challenge to involve space-based interceptors targeting missiles in boost phase
A step forward in the SDI architecture was a revolutionary concept put forward by the scientists from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in 1987, called Brilliant Pebbles. This proposed system was to put thousands of small satellites in low earth orbit at an altitude of around 650 km. In the event of an incoming attack from intercontinental ballistic missiles, these pebbles were to destroy such missiles by smashing into them.
Under present circumstances, the US would not like to have such ideas projected as they would amount to the weaponisation of space.
Still, the modern-day missile shield would have a great amount of dependence on space technologies, but in a different form. Major technological hurdles would require to be overcome for developing tracking space sensors, particularly for an incoming hypersonic threat.
The real challenge is going to be designing and developing space-based interceptors capable of taking out missiles during their boost phase.
Is the idea proposed by Trump outlandish or realistic? The world currently knows the Iron Dome as a highly effective Israeli missile defence system, but it only protects a small geography. If the US were to adopt a similar system, it would be far more complex and different from the Israeli system.
While present-day advancements in AI and machine learning are promising, more focused research is needed to apply AI to the concept of the proposed IRON DOME.
For long, laser technology has shown great potential as a part of an air defence structure for neutralising incoming threats, but significant technological challenges still remain towards making such systems operational.
On February 18, the US Missile Defence Agency will host an Industry Day to explore how the industry can contribute to this project. Obviously, Trump will rely heavily on his friend Elon Musk to develop this ambitious programme.
Known for his antagonism to arms control mechanisms, Trump is also unlikely to consider any strategic implications and the views of other major powers about such a project.
While it will be an extremely costly endeavour, Trump, with his business background, may have already calculated the project’s financial aspects before announcing it. What remains to be seen is whether the project is technically feasible.
Ajey Lele researches space issues and is the author of the book Institutions That Shaped Modern India: ISRO.