Video: Surprise: Russian Paranoia Over Missile Defense Continues, US To Place Aegis BMD Ships "In The Arctic"

Aegis cruiser USS Ticonderoga in rough seas

In the days after Obama's surprise introduction of his new European missile defense plan, many wondered how the Russians would react. The conventional wisdom quickly settled on the "Obama as Chessmaster" view, in which his pragmatic swapping of fixed, ground-based interceptors (GBIs) & radar in Eastern Europe for mobile SM-3's oh-so-cleverly brought the Russians to our side right before Obama dropped the bomb on Iran at the G-20 meeting in Pittsburgh. Brilliant! A masterstroke! (crowing video here) 

I had a different take:

Does anyone really believe the Russians will suddenly be all hunky-dory over a new land-based system after their screeching just successfully killed the old one? Dream on.

For a refresher on what will change under Obama's plan, here are two key highlights from the Pentagon briefing. In the first clip, Gen. Cartwright describes the future SM-3-based system (sea- and land-based), its global mobility, its "substantial capability" against ICBMs, and the geometric increase in interceptor inventory it enjoys. The second half is Gates talking about Russia:

So we're ditching 10 siloed interceptors in a tiny, easily monitored, fixed location in Poland ... for hundreds of extremely mobile ones --- specifically designed to counter massive ICBM missile raids --- in and around Europe both at sea and (probably) on mobile ground launchers. Yep, the Russians will absolutely love that.

What's that? They don't?

You mean the guy who originally touted the nefarious Polish GBI-as-nuke scenario that Gates described above has a new paranoid conspiracy? Why, yes. Yes, he does --- American missile defense ships in the Arctic countering Russia's ICBMs:

[Russia's ambassador to NATO] Dmitry Rogozin's comments showed Moscow's distrust as it awaits details on Pentagon plans to create new mobile interceptor missiles, dropping an earlier U.S. scheme to set up fixed bases in Poland and the Czech Republic.

"Where are the guarantees that this mobile thing, be it a boat, a cruiser, or a battleship with a mounted missile-defense system and with missile interceptors, will not sail into our northern seas?" Rogozin said at a press briefing.

Wait a tick: what about the Arctic permapack and Ice Station Zebra and all that, you ask? How can American Aegis cruisers ply the rock hard Arctic Ocean, Dmitry? Easy, he explains:

He added that the reduction of sea ice in Arctic due to climate change could lead to the all-year-round opening of the Northern Sea Route, is a shipping lane running along Russia's Far Eastern and Siberian coasts that is usually only free of ice for around eight weeks a year.

"The ice would retreat, it would melt, which means that NATO would definitely be present in the Arctic. They have been planning it for a long time, and under the very bad circumstances the U.S. strategic missile defense would arrive there onboard these ships," Rogozin said.

Global warming --- is there anything it can't do?

Comments

[Distiller]

Of course the Russians will be against anything the U.S. brings up. ANYTHING. It's the Russian character to exploit a situation where they think they have the upper hand. They either get their asses kicked or they try to kick some themselves. That's how they are. And they don't feel their asses kicked by Barry and his crew. So ...

As I said in the previous post: Let's see what the Europeans say about having dozens of SM-3/THAAD batteries placed all over Europe, once they realize.

[Jean]

Those SM-3/THAAD launchers also retain a significant capability vice aircraft that the GBI did not have and can perform against the Iskander class of threats. The Russians will never know what the available mix of missiles within each battery is, and will have a devil of a time tracking them.

The Russian position puzzled me, I thought with the potential of mobile GBIs would have scared them off. Now with mobile THAAD and mobile GBI (with a new president) they are in a worse position.

[BigFred]

Not to bust your nuts, but TICONDEROGA is not a Vertical Launch System (VLS) ship, and is decomissioned, so is not a BMD ship.

Everything else is spot on.

[Bob Reed]

I knew this was coming, McKittrick, the moment Obama caved on the GBI battery and radar. And, if Obama was willing to cave n the third leg of the BMD system, under the guise of "resetting our relationship with the Russians", just how long until he decides that these missles won't be placed there either...

Just another incremental step in the Jeen-yus in chief's plan to emasculate our strategic offense/defense and kill BMD altogether...

You know, because of the fairness...

[Bob Reed]

Jean,
SM-3 and THAAD are awesome and versatile systems that will provide a broad range of defense as you mention. But, the SM-3 will not be able to achieve the velocities necessary to intercept ICBM's, after the first moment of the boost phase or mid-course flight, until the block II variants are issued in 2015...

Considering that Iran placed a satellite in orbit last February, and as McKittrick noted in the last thread a mere 6 month interval separated sputnik's flight and the adaptation of the same launch system for ICBM use, that may mean an important base is not being covered...

But you are right that the Russians are now in a worse tactical position owing to the SM-3 batteries, but not a worse strategic one...

Be Cool!

[John McKittrick]

Busted! Thanks for the heads-up, BigFred. While many Tico-class Aegis cruisers are indeed BMD, you correctly note that she herself was not. Caption corrected.

(I picked that pic 'cause it was the most dramatic "Aegis in choppy/icy seas" that Google gave me)

[Jean]

Bob, I wasn't implying they could - but that with a mix of mobile GBIs as Boeing was pushing last month they would present a significant weakening of the Russian position. The only ways the Russian play make sense is either they screwed up (Hanlon's razor) or they believe they can push Obama away from this position as well.