Europe will never match the U.S.’s passion for missile defense; but step-by-step, Washington’s NATO partners are moving to build up capacities that could augment and expand the shield the Pentagon is creating.

Progress will be slow and incremental, though, and—in terms of budget expenditure—will remain a mere fraction of what the U.S. commits to the mission area.

Nevertheless, there is clear momentum in Europe to do more, even if the main motivator is industrial base considerations: France wants to ensure that its missile sector does not lose out to U.S. rivals in providing interceptors to European and other forces, and the Netherlands wants to sustain advanced naval radar capacities.

In the NATO context, budgets are less important than symbolic steps, and this is underscored by the members’ recent move to award a €2.5 million ($3.4 million) contract to an industry team led by Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC), which will define the first elements of a plan that will enlarge the theater missile defense system to cover NATO territory and populations in Europe. Last year, NATO decided that it wanted to protect territory instead of just deployed forces. It was a long political battle, so this study effort—no matter how paltry the funding—has significant implications for the alliance’s future.

Work under the year-long effort is to be performed at the NATO Consultation, Command and Control Agency in The Hague, and “the results will then be taken forward for implementation in the NATO command-and-control network to broaden the capabilities of the NATO commander well beyond those demonstrated recently in missile defense testing between the U.S. and NATO elements last month,” the organization said in announcing the contract.

Alessandro Pera, manager for the Active Layered Theater Ballistic Missile Defense (ALTBMD) program—the command, control and communications backbone for the alliance’s missile shield—says that under the new contract award, “we will work as a team with our industry and national partners, in close consultation with both the NATO military and relevant NATO committees, to ensure we get the job done.”

The NATO contract follows a November 2010 decision at the Lisbon summit to provide the alliance with an additional layer of capability to protect Europe.

Meanwhile, the Netherlands, which has had a longtime interest in a missile shield, is pressing ahead to build up its own capacities. The Dutch defense ministry plans to expand the capabilities of the Thales Smart-L radar on Dutch frigates to take on BMD roles. The program’s value is estimated at €100-250 million, including logistics support and spares.

Other European navies using the sensor may follow the Dutch lead.

Dutch Defense Minister Hans Hillen notes that the Smart-L effort would help address the BMD sensor shortage within the NATO alliance. Citing NATO’s decision last year to take a more expansive approach to BMD, Hillen says Smart-L could give the ALTBMD command-and-control backbone the required long-range target-detection information. The sensor also could provide accurate launch-point detection analysis to help identify where a threat originates.  [Aviation Week]

You can read more at the link to include how Raytheon is promoting its SM-3 missile in an effort to sell it to European allies.

Romania’s top defense body approved an American proposal to base missile interceptors there, the country’s president said Thursday in a hastily arranged announcement.

The president, Traian Basescu, said in a statement that Romania, a former Warsaw Pact member and now part of NATO, was prepared to negotiate with the United States to accept ground-based interceptors as part of an antiballistic missile defense system. He said it could be working by 2015.

While the participation of Poland and the Czech Republic in the missile shield had been well known, the possibility that Romania would join them was not.

Romania made its announcement as Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates was in Turkey for a NATO meeting. He was not immediately available to comment but the White House spokesman, Robert Gibbs, said the announcement was welcomed. “We’re pleased that Romania has agreed to participate in that defense shield,” he told reporters in Washington.  [NY Times]

The interceptors that would be placed in Romania would likely be the land-based SM-3′s that was included in the President’s recent budget proposal.

Riki Ellison, Chairman and Founder of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA), www.missiledefenseadvocacy.org has reviewed the FY2011 Missile Defense Budget released on February 1st by the Department of Defense which offers a substantial increase to the total budget for missile defense. This increase recovers close to half the amount that was cut by the President and Secretary Robert Gates a year ago. Ellison is one of the top lay experts in the world on the topic of missile defense. His comments and observations include the following:

“Early this week, President Barack Obama’s administration and the Department of Defense announced a substantial increase to the 2011 Missile Defense Budget. The amount, $9.42 billion, equals a 6.13 percent increase from the 2010 budget. This increase, $577 million, recovers close to half the amount that was cut by the President and Secretary Robert Gates a year ago. ” [Defence Pros]

People that follow missile defense probably all remember that just back in April the widely publicized cuts in missile defense were announced.  However, the budget was cut, but I did like Secretary Gates strategy of focusing funding on missile defense systems that currently work.

With this new announcement the focusing of money on missile defense that currently works is only continuing:

Among the highlights of the 2011 Missile Defense Budget Request are:

• Increase of development funding of $359 million for the Ground Based Interceptors.
- Plans to construct 38 GBI silos and to buy 56 GBIs.
- A significant reversal from the 30 silos and 44 GBIs from last years request.

• Increase of 249 THAAD (142) and AEGIS SM3 (107) land and sea-based regional missile defense interceptors for a total of 867 by 2015.

• Upgrades of 3 additional Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Ships.

• Addition of three new Missile Defense programs:
- $256 million for the Land-Based SM3 program that will go to over a $1.0 Billion by 2015.
- $99 million to Directed Energy Programs.
- $67 million for a future space based satellite sensor constellation called Precision Tracking Space System (PTSS) that will go to $1.2 Billion by 2015.

• Increase to $1.47 billion (up $31 million) for the AEGIS program.

• Increase to $1.0 billion (up $52 million) for the Patriot Terminal Defense interceptors and systems.

• Increase to $1.11 billion (up $290 million) for missile defense testing and targets.

• Increase to $319 million (up $63 million) for co-development with Japan on the Sea Based SM3-BlockIIa interceptor.

The increased funding into GMD is significant which is interesting considering the failure of the last fight test due to an issue with the SBX sensor.  However, the technology and capability of the GMD program is impressive for those familiar with it and I believe with more testing this can become a more reliable program.  Apparently the President now thinks so as well.

THAAD live fire at the Pacific Missile Range Facility In Hawaii.

What I am most excited about is to see more money being put into the THAAD and AEGIS SM-3 programs.  These are both very successful systems.  Also it was good to see money being poured into the land-based SM-3 program that will allow the missile to deployed in areas that an AEGIS ship cannot access.  Finally considering the failure of the last THAAD flight test due to a target issue it is good to see that more money is being poured into testing and targets.

All in all I continue to believe a solid missile defense strategy is in place by Secretary Gates and President Obama.

The Japan Maritime Self-Defense Force (JMSDF) and the United States Missile Defense Agency (MDA) announced the successful completion of an Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) intercept flight test, in cooperation with the U.S. Navy, off the coast of Kauai in Hawaii. The event, designated Japan Flight Test Mission 3 (JFTM-3), marked the third time that a JMSDF ship has successfully engaged a ballistic missile target, including two successful intercepts, with the sea-based midcourse engagement capability provided by Aegis BMD.

The JFTM-3 test event verified the newest engagement capability of the Japan Aegis BMD configuration of the recently upgraded Japanese destroyer, JS MYOKO (DDG-175). At approximately 6:00pm (HST), 1:00 pm Tokyo time on Oct 28, a separating, medium-range ballistic missile target was launched from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. JS MYOKO crew members detected and tracked the target. The Aegis Weapon System then developed a fire control solution and, at approximately 6:04pm (HST), 1:04 pm Tokyo time a Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) Block IA interceptor missile was launched. Approximately 3 minutes later, the SM-3 successfully intercepted the target approximately 100 miles above the Pacific Ocean. JFTM-3 is a significant milestone in the growing cooperation between Japan and the U.S. in the area of missile defense.

Also participating in the test, were the Pearl Harbor-based USS Lake Erie (CG 70) and USS Paul Hamilton (DDG 60) which detected and tracked the target and conducted a simulated engagement.

Before returning to Japan, JS MYOKO will be loaded with additional SM-3 Block IA missiles. The ship will arrive in Japan ready to provide additional ballistic missile defense capability against the increasing ballistic missile threat present in that region.  [MDA Webpage]

Back in April, the Obama administration announced a big shift in missile-defense priorities: It would move away from ambitious, technologically shaky “boost phase” defenses, and pour more money into fielding anti-missiles that might actually stop an attack from Iran or North Korea. This week, those retooled defenses get a big test – in Israel.

This week, the United States and Israel kicked off a major air-defense exercise that will test scenarios including coordinated missile barrages launched from Iran or from Syria, as well as shorter-range rocket attacks by Hezbollah or Hamas. The exercise, Juniper Cobra, is part of a series of biannual war games that dates back to 2001, but it’s worth watching closely for several reasons.

First, there’s politics. Brig. Gen. Doron Gavish, commander of the Israel Air Force’s Air Defense Division, said in a press conference that the exercise was not related to Iran’s continued missile tests and enrichment of nuclear fuel. “It is a carefully designed exercise that has been taking place for years.” But Ha’aretz describes the drill as “preparation for a faceoff with Iran.”

Case in point: Juniper Cobra includes a major civil-defense exercise that will test readiness against a catastrophic missile strike against an Israeli city. As part of the contingent of 1,000 U.S. troops taking part in the exercise, the Ohio Army National Guard’s Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and high-yield Explosive Enhanced Response Force will take part; the Guardsmen have been training with the Israeli Home Front Command as part of the exercise.

Some of the Obama administration’s favored missile-stoppers will also be deployed for the exercise, including the Army’s Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and the Navy’s Standard Missile-3 (SM-3), part of the sea-based Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense.

The deployment of THAAD — pictured here in a 2006 test — is particularly important. “This unique system intercepts in an transitional area between earth’s atmosphere and space to include a range of 20 miles below and above the 62 mile or 100 kilometer line,” said Riki Ellison, a prominent missile-defense advocate. “None of the current or future deployed missile defense systems intercept in this vertical space. Because of this vertical engagement area capability, the THAAD system can take multiple shots and use the atmosphere to strip off debris and countermeasures to better target the incoming warhead. The larger land-based missile defense system, the GBIs [Ground-Based Interceptors] as well as the sea-based missile defense system, the Aegis and SM-3, intercept above the 100k line at a higher altitudes in space, while the Patriot System ground-based system intercepts missiles in air below the atmosphere.”

The AN/TPY-2 radar — the powerful X-band radar that is part of the THAAD system — was deployed to Israel last year. Military officials have discussed tying this land-based radar to missile-defense ships offshore, creating a more mobile and flexible missile-defense system with wider coverage. [Danger Room]

Read the rest at the link.

In July 2008, Aviation Week reported that the US Missile Defense Agency is considering a land-based variant of the SM-3 Standard missile – largely due to specific requests from Israel.

Israel currently fields the medium range Arrow-2 land-based ABM system, supplemented by Patriot missiles for point defense. The Arrow has performed well in tests, however, and an order for more was placed as recently as February 2008. What could Israel’s rationale be?  [Defense Industry Daily]

The first thing I wondered when I read the headine that Israel wanted SM-3′s, was, I thought that had Arrow?

Well here is Israel’s supposed rationale for wanting the SM-3:

Several possibilities exist that would allow Israel to keep its Arrow system as an active program, and still deploy the SM-3s.

For one thing, Israel’s new LCS-I frigates will have the ability to fire SM-3 missiles. They would need to link to an ABM radar for guidance, however, unless their SPY-1F radars are modified for an ABM role. SPY-1F radars have yet to be modified in this way, unlike their larger and more powerful SPY-1D cousins. In contrast, Israel already fields ABM-capable land radars like its “Green Pine” system. Linkage of the missile’s guidance to those kinds of land platforms, however, would involve many of the same modifications required by a fully land-launched and controlled SM-3.

Second, the SM-3 boats a range about 5x longer than the Arrow, at 300 miles vs. 50-60 miles. A tripartite system of SM-3, Arrow-2, and Patriot missiles would effectively cover the 3 layered tiers required by a country Israel’s size: national defense/ first line of defense, defense of key regions/ second shot, and defense of specific sites/ final attempt.

Read the rest on your own, but it is true that the SM-3 has a tremendous range advantage compared to Arrow.  It makes me wonder if the Israelis are trying to send a message by trying to upgrade their Air Defense Systems plus adding increased C-RAM capability as well?

U.S. lawmakers scolded the Missile Defense Agency for a number of management problems and trimmed its budget in a recently enacted fiscal 2009 appropriations bill (see GSN, Oct. 21).

The appropriations bill criticized several aspects of missile defense operations, including funding priorities in the MDA budget request, flight-test delays and cancellations, and the availability of target missiles for use in testing.

Overall, Congress gave $9.02 billion to the Defense Department’s missile defense arm for the new fiscal year, a figure that largely satisfied agency advocates.

“The reduction was only $320.6 million out of a $9.3 billion request,” MDA spokesman Rick Lehner told Global Security Newswire last week. While some missile defense projects saw their annual budgets decreased, “the programs all were funded [at some level] … so we were pleased,” he said. [NTI Global Security Newswire]

Here is what Congress wants MDA to put emphasis on testing and fielding:

In the bill passed in September, lawmakers said the agency had shifted money into its more exotic, long-term technology development efforts, partially at the expense of fully funding missile defense systems being deployed today.

“In order to execute a balanced program, the Missile Defense Agency must continue to field the near-term missile defense programs, primarily Ground-Based Missile Defense, Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, and Theater High-Altitude Area Defense programs,” the appropriations report states. “Funding for fielding these programs, however, is sacrificed each year to pay for the development of futuristic missile defense programs.”

The bill sought to remedy the problem by shifting $120 million into the three near-term efforts, financed by reductions to the longer-term Multiple Kill Vehicle, Airborne Laser and Space Test Bed programs. It directed the agency to report to Congress by Dec. 1 on how it would specifically allocate the additional funds.

Lawmakers also called on the agency to set as its “highest priority” providing additional Standard Missile 3 and THAAD interceptors to combatant commanders and to “budget accordingly” in its fiscal 2010 funding request.

Congress is obviously pushing to complete near term missile defense projects like the Aegis SM-3 along with Air Defense Artillery’s very own THAAD program. It is good to see THAAD is considered a Congressional priority which should protect the program from any potential Pentagon cutbacks coming in a new Presidential administration.