战略与国际研究中心-Report-on-Homeland-Defense-and-National-Missile-Defenses_371页_1mb

Summary of "Defending America: Redefining the Conceptual Borders of Homeland Defense"

Core Content

This report, authored by Anthony H. Cordesman and prepared as part of the CSIS Homeland Defense project, evaluates the strategic, technical, and political implications of deploying a National Missile Defense (NMD) system in the United States. It highlights the complexities of homeland defense in a multipolar world and argues against the unilateral deployment of NMD without a comprehensive and integrated approach.

Main Points and Key Arguments

1. Proliferation and Emerging Threats

• The proliferation of long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction (WMDs) poses a growing threat to the US homeland.
• While Iran and North Korea may develop such capabilities, the immediate threat is not yet realized.
• Long-term threats from these states could be more severe than near-term ones, especially if they develop advanced missile systems or WMDs.
• NMD is not a substitute for offensive capabilities, arms control, or deterrence strategies.

2. Limitations of NMD

• The current NMD system is limited in scope, only effective against intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), and inadequate against shorter-range systems, cruise missiles, bombers, and CBRN (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear) attacks.
• NMD cannot replace a comprehensive homeland defense strategy that includes diplomacy, regional counterproliferation, and other defensive measures.
• The "balloon effect" suggests that NMD could push hostile states to use alternative, more difficult-to-detect, and cheaper methods of attack.

3. Strategic and Technical Challenges

• The US must balance the deployment of NMD with the need to maintain strategic stability with Russia and China.
• NMD could destabilize arms control efforts and provoke regional tensions, especially if it is perceived as a threat to Russian and Chinese nuclear capabilities.
• China and Russia are significant sources of technology that enable rogue states to develop missile capabilities, so the US must not be paralyzed by treaty obligations.

4. Political and Technical Compromises

• The current NMD program is politically driven, shaped by domestic political considerations rather than strategic needs.
• The test and evaluation program is inadequate and politically influenced, making it difficult to assess the system's true effectiveness.
• There is a lack of integration between NMD and other defense systems, such as theater missile defense (TMD) and CBRN defense.

5. Recommendations for a Success-Driven Approach

• The next administration should restructure the NMD program to focus on success, not just schedule.
• A full-scale test bed system is necessary to develop a combat-proven NMD capability.
• The program should be flexible, allowing for evolution based on real-world threats and arms control progress.
• A zero-based review of NMD and arms control interactions is required to ensure a balanced and realistic approach.

Key Considerations for the US

• Integration: NMD must be integrated with theater defense, CBRN defense, and extended deterrence to be effective.
• Cost: The life-cycle costs of NMD are expected to be significantly higher than current estimates, potentially two to six times the projected cost.
• Transparency: The program should be transparent to Congress and the public to ensure informed debate and pragmatic decision-making.
• Deterrence: The US must maintain offensive and retaliatory capabilities to ensure deterrence and prevent asymmetric threats from escalating.

Conclusion

The report concludes that while deferring NMD deployment is a wise decision, it is not sufficient. A comprehensive, flexible, and integrated approach to homeland defense is essential. This includes:

• A success-driven test and deployment schedule.
• A realistic assessment of costs and effectiveness.
• A balanced approach to arms control and strategic stability.
• A holistic strategy that includes theater defense, CBRN defense, and offensive capabilities.

The deployment of NMD must be linked to broader strategic goals and arms control negotiations, rather than being pursued in isolation. Any NMD system must be cost-effective, technically viable, and politically sustainable to truly serve the national interest.