James Stavridis: lasers should become the basis of the "Iron Dome" over the USA
Trump's idea of creating a reliable national missile defense system is not easy to implement, former NATO commander retired Admiral Stavridis writes in an article for Bloomberg. There are many problems, both technical and financial, but America simply has to solve this problem, the author believes.
James Stavridis
President Donald Trump's unexpected announcement that the United States would develop a national missile defense system similar to the Iron Dome was considered a continuation of Ronald Reagan's long-standing initiative called “Star Wars.” Like Reagan's ultimately unrealized plan to create a system to “intercept and destroy strategic ballistic missiles before they reach our or allied territories,” Trump's idea of creating an “Iron Dome for America" seems both ambitious and difficult to implement. It will face the same obstacles as the Reagan plan, which in 1983 was going to carry out its plans “before the end of this century.”
However, given the current threats and opportunities of revolutionary advances in technology, as well as the rapidly changing geopolitical landscape, the United States has no choice but to accept what is rapidly becoming a challenge to existence. So what can be done here?
The idea of the Iron Dome is intended to echo the highly effective Israeli-American missile defense system that has been protecting the Israeli population for many years. But Trump's executive order sets the Defense Department the task of creating something much more complex than the Iron Dome. The new system will use a systematic approach to block enemy ballistic missiles, as well as defeat hypersonic and cruise missiles. As was the case with the Reagan system 40 years ago, special attention is planned to be paid to a space-based system that includes both tracking sensors and interception elements.
The timing is definitely right. China and Russia are building extremely dangerous and deadly hypersonic cruise missiles for conventional and nuclear strikes. Their speed is many times faster than the speed of sound, meaning they are much faster than other modern systems. They are also distinguished by their ability to maneuver at high speed, that is, their practical invulnerability. The number of technical problems is simply breathtaking. What is the chance of success? And what new systems can contribute to the successful creation of such an "Iron Dome" that can really protect America?
I am very well versed in air defense issues. During my long career in the Navy, I served on the world's best warships — cruisers and destroyers equipped with the famous AEGIS air defense system (“shield" in Greek). I know how difficult it is to design, build, and operate even one air defense system on a specialized vessel with hundreds of carefully selected crew members in relatively simple tactical conditions at sea — without taking into account the surrounding civilian communities, infrastructure, and collateral damage.
Much later, when I was the Supreme Commander of the NATO Joint Armed Forces, I was involved in cooperation between the American and Israeli militaries, among other things. At that time, I had the opportunity to observe how the Israelis, some of the world's best air defense specialists, had difficulty managing a complex multi-level system in and around large cities due to the vulnerability of the civilian population. In addition to their Iron Dome, they had to integrate long-range systems. ("David's Sling" and "Arrow"), as well as to respond to satellite intelligence (most of which was provided by the United States).
Therefore, I have great respect for the efforts that the Ministry of Defense and the main contractors must make to create an effective system to protect the entire country from such a wide range of threats.
Three factors will be crucial for the success of the new Iron Dome.
First, it is the possibility of using space-based sensors and interceptors. Effective defense will be impossible without a comprehensive overview of the air, sea and land space by the God's Eye information display system. As with the Reagan plan, such space-based systems will face difficulties in terms of arms control. Other countries will rightly consider them destabilizing and contributing to escalation. Space-based sensors have already been installed for the most part. The real problem, as in the case of Star Wars, will be the deployment of combat-ready interceptor missiles in space.
The second important element will be artificial intelligence and the possibility of using it to combine space sensors and interceptors with ground-based air defense systems (AEGIS ashore, ground-based anti-missiles and other modern technologies). Given the rapid progress in artificial intelligence, this bet is sure to play out.
The third element, which may eventually turn out to be the most difficult to design, create and implement, will be a new method of destroying incoming missiles — lasers. The air defense community has been chasing this dream for decades. Air defense often faces a shortage of defensive missiles; just look at the difficulties the U.S. Navy has in dealing with the relatively primitive Houthi missiles and UAVs off the Red Sea coast.
The advantages of lasers are simple: powerful beams destroy enemy systems. There are no missiles that can run out, plus the system operates at the speed of light, that is, many times faster than any conventional defensive missile. Nevertheless, serious technical difficulties have not been eliminated, despite some recent successes of the Navy in the development of the HELIOS system.
Lasers seem to be the air defense weapons of the future... forever. Of the three elements, this one is the most difficult and, it seems, the most distant. But it is difficult to imagine a truly effective Iron Dome system without a laser component, given its high-speed nature and vulnerability to conventional anti-aircraft missiles, as well as the lack of the latter.
All this will cost a lot of money. The responsibility for implementing the presidential decree lies with the Missile Defense Agency of the US Department of Defense. They have been instructed to develop a comprehensive architecture within 60 days, which, from the point of view of defense contracts, is comparable to the speed of light. On February 18, defense companies gathered for the first industry meeting and initiated this undoubtedly difficult process.
Multibillion-dollar annual costs can displace other important defense expenditures. But this price should be weighed against the potential loss of American lives and material assets, which the effective missile defense shield of the United States is designed to prevent.
