Analysts and experts say cancellation of the U.S. Navy Area Missile Defense System might anger U.S. allies, who were hoping to use the Block IVA missile for their own ship-based systems, Defense Daily reported yesterday (see GSN, Dec. 20).

The Pentagon canceled development of the sea-based theater missile defense system last month due to cost overruns and technical flaws (see GSN, Dec. 17).  U.S. allies such as Germany, Japan and Spain, however, were planning to use the Block IVA missile being developed as part of the system, according to analysts.  The defense contractor Lockheed Martin had also developed a software upgrade to its Aegis fire-control system to accommodate the new missile, Defense Daily reported.

“A number of foreign navies planned to configure their ships to deal with this missile and we pulled the plug on it,” said Frank Cevasco of Hicks & Associates.

“Clearly, the program had its problems, but I’m not sure from an international standpoint pushing it over the cliff was necessarily the right thing to do,” Cevasco said.  “It’s things like this that makes it hard for countries which want to work with the United States to do so, and only feeds the impression that the U.S. is willing to leave you in a lurch.”

The Block IVA missile was appealing to U.S. allies because it was similar to the SM-2 air defense missile and could be more easily installed on ships with the Aegis system than the more advanced SM-3 could, said Stuart Slade of Forecast International/DMS.

“SM-2 Block IVA had significantly less ship impact than the SM-3,” which made it more attractive for export, Slade said.  “That’s why the Dutch, the Germans, the Spanish and the Norwegians, to a lesser extent, had in the back of their minds that their new Aegis ships would take on some of the ABM capabilities by using Block IVA without making it too obvious.”

“Basically, under the guise of getting a really good air defense weapon, they would also get an anti-missile capability without admitting they had it,” Slade said.

Slade said the halt on development of the Block IVA could force allies into helping develop the SM-3, which is a more advanced missile.

“From the European point of view, Block IVA was a very convenient option.  But from the DOD standpoint, it was simply redundant,” he said.  “Block IVA did a lot of things less well than SM-3.  The best way to think about it is Block IVA was a transition weapon to SM-3.  Now these countries have to ask whether they want to invest the extra money to acquire a more elaborate, and efficient, weapon or give up their antimissile ambitions” (Vago Muradian, Defense Daily, Jan. 3).

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP

Back to top