2012年-CEPS欧洲政策研究中心_Does_Europe_Need_a_New_Missile_Defence_System_32页_217kb

Summary of "Does Europe Need a New Missile Defence System?"

Core Content

This working paper explores the debate surrounding the United States' proposal to establish a European missile defence system as part of its broader ballistic missile defence (BMD) strategy. The discussion involves perspectives from the US, Russia, and European officials, with a focus on the strategic, political, and military implications of the initiative.

Main Points and Key Information

US Perspective

• Purpose of the System: The US aims to counter the threat posed by 'rogue states' such as Iran, which may acquire nuclear weapons and long-range missiles.
• Deployment Details: The system includes ground-based interceptors (GBIs) in Poland and an X-band radar in the Czech Republic, with a forward-based radar potentially deployed near Iran.
• Technical Readiness: The system is expected to be operational by 2011–2013 and is designed to intercept long-range missiles from Iran targeting the US or Europe.
• NATO Involvement: The project is not a NATO initiative but a trilateral agreement between the US, Poland, and the Czech Republic. The US has not committed to making the system available to NATO.
• Cost and Control: The US will cover the full cost of the system and maintain national command and control, with no formal standards for its use in the absence of a direct threat.

European Perspective

• Controversy and Concerns: The system has sparked significant controversy, particularly in Russia, due to perceived threats to strategic balance and nuclear deterrence.
• NATO's Role: NATO has expressed interest in missile defence, especially for protecting its short- and medium-range missile threats. The alliance has not fully integrated the system into its structure.
• Political Implications: The deployment is seen by some as an extension of US unilateralism, raising concerns about European sovereignty and the future of NATO and the EU's defence initiatives.

Russian Perspective

• Opposition to the System: Russia, under President Vladimir Putin, has strongly opposed the European missile defence system, viewing it as a threat to its strategic interests and nuclear deterrence.
• Reasons for Opposition:
  • The system could undermine Russia's nuclear deterrent by enabling the US to intercept Russian missiles.
  • The US is perceived as violating earlier assurances given to Poland and the Czech Republic upon their NATO accession.
  • Russia's opposition is also seen as a political strategy to rally support for its own military and strategic initiatives.
• Strategic and Political Motives:
  • Russia seeks to reassert its influence and prestige in the post-Soviet era.
  • The opposition may be partly motivated by the desire to provoke Western unity and highlight perceived US aggression.
  • The Russian stance is also linked to its broader concerns about NATO enlargement and arms control treaties.

Debate on Missile Defence Effectiveness

• Technical Challenges: Critics argue that the US system has not yet proven its effectiveness in realistic operational tests, especially against countermeasures.
• US Confidence: The US believes the system is capable of intercepting Iranian missiles and that technological improvements will maintain its effectiveness.
• Alternative Means of Delivery: The system would not address non-ballistic delivery methods, such as aircraft or agents, which could bypass missile defences.

Crisis Stability and Deterrence

• Thranert's Argument: Oliver Thranert suggests that missile defence can contribute to crisis stability by reducing the need for preemptive strikes and by preventing Iran from deterring the West.
• Pikayev's View: Alexander Pikayev highlights the importance of cooperation with Russia on early warning systems and notes that the US has proposed a joint data exchange centre (JDEC) with Russia.
• Slocombe's Insight: Walter Slocombe acknowledges the potential of the system but emphasizes the need for a clear and cooperative framework to manage its deployment and operation.

Conclusion

• The US proposal for a European missile defence system is a strategic and political initiative that has significant implications for the region.
• While the US maintains that the system is primarily for countering Iranian threats, it has raised concerns in Russia and Europe.
• The system's effectiveness and integration into NATO remain contentious issues.
• The debate reflects broader tensions between the US and Russia, as well as the evolving security landscape in Europe and the Middle East.