The article discusses the growing threat of ballistic missile proliferation and the corresponding development of missile defense systems. The US has taken the first steps in deploying a missile defense system to protect against intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) by installing interceptors in Alaska and California. However, the threat of ballistic missiles is not limited to the US as countries like Japan have also recognized the need for defense against threats from North Korea and Iran. While the US system is initially limited, cooperation between allies could create a more robust sensor and interceptor network against ICBMs.

1. 4 Military Technology · MILTECH · 8/2005
such a system provides security against a low-level threat, it can grow, through the addi-
tion of capabilities proven over time, into a defence against potentially more robust
threats in the future.
Japan has the elementary tools of missile defence – PATRIOT ground-based
systems and SM-2s aboard AEGIS destroyers. It has budgeted to upgrade the PATRI-
OT, buy the new SM-3 missile, and upgrade the command-and-control structure for
these systems in a ballistic defence capability. Japan and the United States also are
working on a joint testing programme for interceptor components. Australia also has
expressed its willingness to participate with the United States in strategic missile
defence.
In Europe, so far, there is no full consensus to embrace strategic missile
defence, although some countries are cooperating individually with US efforts.
Several European countries are candidates for ground-based interceptors, and
England and Greenland host radar stations. NATO wisely is studying a theater
missile defence programme for its tactical forces. It is far more deliberate in
approving a missile defence system to protect all NATO territory, or linking to
the US missile defence programme, instead moving from study to study.
Even though limited, these initial steps by US allies are encouraging. As it
happens, they could end up entering the missile defence arena at an advan-
tageous time. Right now, there is enormous potential to create a true net-
work of missile defence sensors, radars and interceptors that would great-
ly strengthen protection against ICBMs. A process called data fusion would
allow operators to use readings from various sensors – electro-optical and
infrared sensors as well as and radars – to determine the most effective
interceptor of an ICBM. This would result in a missile defence system
that employs “birth-to-death” tracking, that is, tracking of a missile from
launch to its terminal phase. Target data would be shared throughout the
system, allowing operators to choose the best of sensor data and the
best of interceptors for a specific target.
The potential benefit of such a system employed by the United States
and its allies globally is enormous to all involved. Such a development
would allow a shift in the nuclear arms age from mutually assured
destruction of adversaries to mutually assured defence of allies.
Summary
The trend in the global WMD threat is hardly encouraging. But
the trend in missile defence technology holds great promise for
ensuring the safety of peaceful nations around the world. The more
nations that join the effort to expand missile defence, the faster that
promise will become reality.
A THAAD anti-missile missile
manoeuvering to intercept its target.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
Offprint from MILITARY TECHNOLOGY· Vol. XXIX· Issue 8·2005 ISSN 0722-3226
● €12,50
● US $ 14,00
Peter C. Franklin
Viable Missile
Defence Depends
on International
Cooperation
mt 8/05 franklin 17.08.2005 12:19 Uhr Seite 4

2. The US has deployed a Ground-Based Mid-Course
ABM system that while described as “rudimentary”
is nonetheless adequate to provide protection against
possible attacks involving a few missiles.
Picture shows an interceptor missile during a test launch.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
3Military Technology · MILTECH · 8/2005
There are several reasons why nations other
than the United States are potential targets for
WMDs delivered by missiles. One is regional
rivalries that do not involve the United States.
Another is the difficulty in acquiring long-range
delivery systems versus the easy access to
shorter-range missiles. Proximity equates to
vulnerability. Japan learned that lesson in 1998
when North Korea launched a three-stage mis-
sile that crossed over Japanese territory on its
930-mile flight. North Korea described it as a
failed attempt to launch a satellite. Whatever its
intent, Pyongyang demonstrated its ability to
launch a multi-stage ICBM.
Japan felt the initial heat of North Korea’s
TAEPODONG 1 missile as it crossed over its
territory. But North Korea’s penchant for ignor-
ing international law in the development and
proliferation of outlawed weapon technology
extends the threat far beyond the range of mis-
siles launched from its own territory. US nation-
al intelligence agencies and private-sector
researchers report that Iran is aggressively pur-
suing not only WMDs, but longer-range ballistic
missiles, in part by buying technology from
North Korea. In a world where about the only
safe prediction for the future of global security
is greater unpredictability, missile defence
needs to be a consideration for even the most
peaceful nations. Analysts debate the gravity of
the ballistic missile threat and the technical
capabilities of potential adversaries. But analy-
sis based on distant observations of highly
secretive programmes can easily underesti-
mate the risk. This is not an issue in which
responsible nations should employ optimism.
And the long-term trend is certainly in the direc-
tion of greater advances in the development of
both nuclear weapons and missile technology.
The First Steps
The good news is that defence against long-
range missiles continues to come closer to
realisation. The United States has emplaced
what military officials describe as a “rudimen-
tary” missile defence system. Interceptors in
Alaska and California are connected to a net-
work of sensors able to detect ballistic missiles
in flight. Significant ground, simulation and
flight testing have provided confidence in the
technical capability of the systems. The
ground-based interceptor has had five suc-
cesses in eight attempts, with the latest two
attempts scrubbed before the interceptor was
launched. More testing is scheduled. The sea-
based interceptor, Raytheon’s STANDARD
Missile-3 (SM-3), has scored five successful
intercepts in six attempts. Also, the sea-based
X-band radar, designed to track ballistic missile
and sort out decoys, will be on station in the
Pacific Ocean later this year.
What’s in place now is not fully operational.
But military officials have described it as offer-
ing some capability that could be used in an
emergency against the current and emerging
threats. It is far from the interconnected system
with multiple kill options that is envisioned. But
certainly, the pieces are falling into place.
Considering the nature of the existing threat,
this initial ballistic missile defence system pro-
vides sufficient protection. That is because the
threat today is not a Soviet-style barrage in a
mutually assured destruction attack. Rather,
the risk is from an unstable, militaristic state or
other organisation with limited means using a
single ballistic missile, or certainly a very small
number. The intent would be using these mis-
siles as weapons of terror or coercion rather
than a means of destroying its targeted enemy.
Even a nascent ballistic missile defence system
can protect against that level of threat. While
2
The threat of ballistic missile proliferation has received
substantial attention worldwide, far more than the parallel
developments in missile defence. As the threat of long-
range weapons of mass destruction grows, the United
States is taking a first step in deploying an active missile
defence system by installing interceptors at sites in
Alaska and California. This represents a significant mile-
stone as the world’s first non-nuclear defence system
against intercontinental ballistic missiles.
As the United States continues to make advances in missile defence, how-
ever, most nations are watching. Many US allies continue to evaluate both the
threat of long-range ballistic missiles and the corresponding advancements in
the technology that can provide a defence. Japan, on the other hand, has rec-
ognised the need for ballistic missile defence and has responded decisively.
Recognising The Threat
The United States is certainly at the forefront of missile defence, recognis-
ing the threat from North Korea and Iran, both of which are exploring nuclear
weapons and long-range missile technology. Yet it is naive to think that the
United States is alone in being exposed to the threat of attack by ballistic mis-
siles carrying weapons of mass destruction. The nuclear weapons pro-
grammes of North Korea and Iran pose the most immediate threat to US allies
in Asia and Europe.
And the threat goes far beyond those two nations. The possibility of prolife-
ration to other outlaw countries and non-state terrorist groups raises the risk
considerably. As we have tragically seen in terrorist attacks in London, Spain,
and Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, any law-abiding nation is a potential target
for a group such as al Qaeda intent on inflicting massive harm.
Peter C. Franklin
Viable Missile
Defence Depends
on International
Cooperation
Maj. Gen. Peter C. Franklin, US Army (Ret.) is a former
deputy director of the US Missile Defense Agency and
currently Vice-President of Raytheon Integrated De-
fence Systems’ Missile Defence Strategic Business
Area.
An interceptor missile is being lowered into
its underground silo at Ft. Greely, Alaska.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
An SM-3 sea-based interceptor at launch.
In addition to the US Navy, Japan has
decided to procure the system for its DDGs.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
Military Technology · MILTECH · 8/2005
mt 8/05 franklin 17.08.2005 12:19 Uhr Seite 2

3. The US has deployed a Ground-Based Mid-Course
ABM system that while described as “rudimentary”
is nonetheless adequate to provide protection against
possible attacks involving a few missiles.
Picture shows an interceptor missile during a test launch.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
3Military Technology · MILTECH · 8/2005
There are several reasons why nations other
than the United States are potential targets for
WMDs delivered by missiles. One is regional
rivalries that do not involve the United States.
Another is the difficulty in acquiring long-range
delivery systems versus the easy access to
shorter-range missiles. Proximity equates to
vulnerability. Japan learned that lesson in 1998
when North Korea launched a three-stage mis-
sile that crossed over Japanese territory on its
930-mile flight. North Korea described it as a
failed attempt to launch a satellite. Whatever its
intent, Pyongyang demonstrated its ability to
launch a multi-stage ICBM.
Japan felt the initial heat of North Korea’s
TAEPODONG 1 missile as it crossed over its
territory. But North Korea’s penchant for ignor-
ing international law in the development and
proliferation of outlawed weapon technology
extends the threat far beyond the range of mis-
siles launched from its own territory. US nation-
al intelligence agencies and private-sector
researchers report that Iran is aggressively pur-
suing not only WMDs, but longer-range ballistic
missiles, in part by buying technology from
North Korea. In a world where about the only
safe prediction for the future of global security
is greater unpredictability, missile defence
needs to be a consideration for even the most
peaceful nations. Analysts debate the gravity of
the ballistic missile threat and the technical
capabilities of potential adversaries. But analy-
sis based on distant observations of highly
secretive programmes can easily underesti-
mate the risk. This is not an issue in which
responsible nations should employ optimism.
And the long-term trend is certainly in the direc-
tion of greater advances in the development of
both nuclear weapons and missile technology.
The First Steps
The good news is that defence against long-
range missiles continues to come closer to
realisation. The United States has emplaced
what military officials describe as a “rudimen-
tary” missile defence system. Interceptors in
Alaska and California are connected to a net-
work of sensors able to detect ballistic missiles
in flight. Significant ground, simulation and
flight testing have provided confidence in the
technical capability of the systems. The
ground-based interceptor has had five suc-
cesses in eight attempts, with the latest two
attempts scrubbed before the interceptor was
launched. More testing is scheduled. The sea-
based interceptor, Raytheon’s STANDARD
Missile-3 (SM-3), has scored five successful
intercepts in six attempts. Also, the sea-based
X-band radar, designed to track ballistic missile
and sort out decoys, will be on station in the
Pacific Ocean later this year.
What’s in place now is not fully operational.
But military officials have described it as offer-
ing some capability that could be used in an
emergency against the current and emerging
threats. It is far from the interconnected system
with multiple kill options that is envisioned. But
certainly, the pieces are falling into place.
Considering the nature of the existing threat,
this initial ballistic missile defence system pro-
vides sufficient protection. That is because the
threat today is not a Soviet-style barrage in a
mutually assured destruction attack. Rather,
the risk is from an unstable, militaristic state or
other organisation with limited means using a
single ballistic missile, or certainly a very small
number. The intent would be using these mis-
siles as weapons of terror or coercion rather
than a means of destroying its targeted enemy.
Even a nascent ballistic missile defence system
can protect against that level of threat. While
2
The threat of ballistic missile proliferation has received
substantial attention worldwide, far more than the parallel
developments in missile defence. As the threat of long-
range weapons of mass destruction grows, the United
States is taking a first step in deploying an active missile
defence system by installing interceptors at sites in
Alaska and California. This represents a significant mile-
stone as the world’s first non-nuclear defence system
against intercontinental ballistic missiles.
As the United States continues to make advances in missile defence, how-
ever, most nations are watching. Many US allies continue to evaluate both the
threat of long-range ballistic missiles and the corresponding advancements in
the technology that can provide a defence. Japan, on the other hand, has rec-
ognised the need for ballistic missile defence and has responded decisively.
Recognising The Threat
The United States is certainly at the forefront of missile defence, recognis-
ing the threat from North Korea and Iran, both of which are exploring nuclear
weapons and long-range missile technology. Yet it is naive to think that the
United States is alone in being exposed to the threat of attack by ballistic mis-
siles carrying weapons of mass destruction. The nuclear weapons pro-
grammes of North Korea and Iran pose the most immediate threat to US allies
in Asia and Europe.
And the threat goes far beyond those two nations. The possibility of prolife-
ration to other outlaw countries and non-state terrorist groups raises the risk
considerably. As we have tragically seen in terrorist attacks in London, Spain,
and Kenya and Tanzania in 1998, any law-abiding nation is a potential target
for a group such as al Qaeda intent on inflicting massive harm.
Peter C. Franklin
Viable Missile
Defence Depends
on International
Cooperation
Maj. Gen. Peter C. Franklin, US Army (Ret.) is a former
deputy director of the US Missile Defense Agency and
currently Vice-President of Raytheon Integrated De-
fence Systems’ Missile Defence Strategic Business
Area.
An interceptor missile is being lowered into
its underground silo at Ft. Greely, Alaska.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
An SM-3 sea-based interceptor at launch.
In addition to the US Navy, Japan has
decided to procure the system for its DDGs.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
Military Technology · MILTECH · 8/2005
mt 8/05 franklin 17.08.2005 12:19 Uhr Seite 2

4. 4 Military Technology · MILTECH · 8/2005
such a system provides security against a low-level threat, it can grow, through the addi-
tion of capabilities proven over time, into a defence against potentially more robust
threats in the future.
Japan has the elementary tools of missile defence – PATRIOT ground-based
systems and SM-2s aboard AEGIS destroyers. It has budgeted to upgrade the PATRI-
OT, buy the new SM-3 missile, and upgrade the command-and-control structure for
these systems in a ballistic defence capability. Japan and the United States also are
working on a joint testing programme for interceptor components. Australia also has
expressed its willingness to participate with the United States in strategic missile
defence.
In Europe, so far, there is no full consensus to embrace strategic missile
defence, although some countries are cooperating individually with US efforts.
Several European countries are candidates for ground-based interceptors, and
England and Greenland host radar stations. NATO wisely is studying a theater
missile defence programme for its tactical forces. It is far more deliberate in
approving a missile defence system to protect all NATO territory, or linking to
the US missile defence programme, instead moving from study to study.
Even though limited, these initial steps by US allies are encouraging. As it
happens, they could end up entering the missile defence arena at an advan-
tageous time. Right now, there is enormous potential to create a true net-
work of missile defence sensors, radars and interceptors that would great-
ly strengthen protection against ICBMs. A process called data fusion would
allow operators to use readings from various sensors – electro-optical and
infrared sensors as well as and radars – to determine the most effective
interceptor of an ICBM. This would result in a missile defence system
that employs “birth-to-death” tracking, that is, tracking of a missile from
launch to its terminal phase. Target data would be shared throughout the
system, allowing operators to choose the best of sensor data and the
best of interceptors for a specific target.
The potential benefit of such a system employed by the United States
and its allies globally is enormous to all involved. Such a development
would allow a shift in the nuclear arms age from mutually assured
destruction of adversaries to mutually assured defence of allies.
Summary
The trend in the global WMD threat is hardly encouraging. But
the trend in missile defence technology holds great promise for
ensuring the safety of peaceful nations around the world. The more
nations that join the effort to expand missile defence, the faster that
promise will become reality.
A THAAD anti-missile missile
manoeuvering to intercept its target.
(Photo: Missile Defense Agency)
Offprint from MILITARY TECHNOLOGY· Vol. XXIX· Issue 8·2005 ISSN 0722-3226
● €12,50
● US $ 14,00
Peter C. Franklin
Viable Missile
Defence Depends
on International
Cooperation
mt 8/05 franklin 17.08.2005 12:19 Uhr Seite 4