The
Militarization of Planet Earth: U.S. Extends Missile
Buildup From Poland And Taiwan To the Persian Gulf
Writers Articles And Opinions
7 February 2010
By Rick Rozoff
On January 20 Poland’s Defense Ministry revealed that
a U.S. Patriot missile battery previously scheduled to
be stationed near the nation’s capital will instead be
deployed to a Baltic Sea location 35 miles from
Russian territory; on January 29 the White House
approved the transfer of 114 Patriot missiles to
Taiwan as part of a $6.5 billion arms package that
also includes eight warships the receiving nation
plans to upgrade for the Aegis Combat System with the
capacity for carrying Standard Missile 3 (SM-3)
ship-based anti-ballistic missiles.
On January 22 head of the Pentagon’s Central Command
General David Petraeus told an audience at the private
Institute for the Study of War that two warships
equipped with the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense
System “are in the Gulf at all times now.” [1] A news
report on the same day remarked “That statement –
along with the stationing of other U.S. air defense
assets in the region – sends a strong signal to
Iran….” [2]
The New York Times reported on January 30 that the
U.S. was expediting the deployment of Patriot Advanced
Capability-3 (PAC-3) interceptor missiles to four
Persian Gulf nations – Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and the
United Arab Emirates – thereby paralleling the
combination of sea-based Aegis and land-based Patriot
missiles intended for the Taiwan Strait aimed at China
and in the Baltic Sea targeting Russia. The Gulf
deployments are intended for use against Iran.
“One senior military officer said that General
Petraeus had started talking openly about the Patriot
deployments about a month ago, when it became
increasingly clear that international efforts toward
imposing sanctions against Iran faced hurdles….” [3]
On February 1 The Times of London commented on the
coordinated interceptor missile plans: “Tensions in
the Gulf between the US and Iran are set to rise
further after it emerged that American-made
anti-missile systems are to be deployed to
Washington’s Arab allies in the region.
“The Obama Administration said yesterday that it was
speeding up arms sales to a number of states and that
it had also deployed warships in the Gulf….”
As in the Baltic Sea and Taiwan, PAC-3 missiles –
“dedicated almost entirely to the anti-ballistic
missile mission” [4] and which soon will have their
capability increased by 50% with an upgrade called
Missile Segment Enhancement – will be used for short-
to medium-range and Aegis class warships for medium to
long-range missile interceptions. The basic
ingredients of a multilayered theater missile shield.
Last May an American news source waxed enthusiastic
over Aegis capabilities: “The AEGIS combat system, at
its heart, is a computer controlled combat and data
system. It can simultaneously launch strikes against
missiles or other targets in the air, and on land and
sea, either surface or underwater.
“AEGIS is the most capable missile launch system the
Navy has ever put to sea. In any weather, including
full cyclones, AEGIS can attack multiple targets
underwater, and from wave top to directly overhead, at
all speeds from subsonic to supersonic.” [5]
Its Standard Missile-3, already in the Persian Gulf
and soon to be permanently based in the Baltic, South
China, Mediterranean and Black Seas, has an
acknowledged range of 500 kilometers but can be
enhanced for longer distances and was used by the U.S.
to destroy a satellite 130 miles above the Pacific
Ocean in February of 2008 in a test inspected by
Admiral Michael Mullen, chairman of the U.S. Joint
Chiefs of Staff. “The satellite was unlike any target
the system was designed to go after….The satellite was
in orbit rather than on a ballistic trajectory. Also,
the satellite was traveling at incredible speeds.” [6]
As to the Patriot missile defense system, it is the
only component of the U.S. (and allied) global
interceptor project to be used in combat, both times
in full-fledged wars.
Patriots were employed in Operation Desert Storm in
1991 against Iraqi Scud missiles and were based in
Israel, not a formal belligerent in the war, and Saudi
Arabia, which was and which served as a base for a
large percentage of the 100,000 sorties by the U.S.
and its allies in the air war over Kuwait and Iraq.
The U.S. stationed and used Patriot missiles in Kuwait
2003 during the invasion of Iraq and the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization deployed three Patriot
batteries (and AWACS) to Turkey before the attack.
Unlike other, longer-range, elements of the layered
missile shield system, the Patriot has been proven an
effective battlefield weapon. It is only defensive in
the sense that a shield was a means of defense for a
sword-wielding warrior or armor is for a battle tank.
It is designed to protect an aggressor from
counterattack.
In commenting on the Pentagon’s plans to move Patriot
and SM-3 – and even longer-range – missiles into the
Persian Gulf, a newspaper in the region wrote that “US
anti-missile systems may be installed in Bahrain to
protect the country against possible retaliatory
attacks from Iran….” [7] A degree of candor absent in
the American press. One which reveals that the U.S. is
installing interceptor missiles in the Gulf as it did
earlier in 1991 and 2003 to neutralize short- and
medium-range missiles fired in response to acts or
threats of aggression.
One of the false rationales for the expanded missile
deployments dutifully retailed by major American and
British newspapers of late is that they are intended
in part to prevent rather than encourage attacks on
Iran by Israel. That argument is contrary to logic and
fact alike. By assuring the second nation and Gulf
states Bahrain, Kuwait, Qatar and Saudi Arabia which
host U.S. infantry, air and naval forces that they are
invulnerable to retaliation after attacks on Iran is
to increase the risk of unprovoked Israeli and U.S.
assaults.
Compared to 1991 and 2003, though, the groundwork for
a much broader conflict is being laid, one which will
include interceptor missiles several stages more
advanced than the Patriot and SM-3.
Last August it was reported that “Saudi Arabia and the
U.A.E. [United Arab Emirates]…want a wide range of
military platforms, with particular interest in
missile defense systems such as the U.S. Theater High
Altitude Air Defense system [THAAD]. Approval was
recently given for the Pentagon to sell this to the
U.A.E., THAAD’s first foreign customer.” [8]
THAAD picks up where the SM-3 (which is being
transitioned for ground deployment in Europe and the
Middle East as part of new – post-September 17, 2009 –
U.S. and NATO interceptor missile plans) leaves off
and after THAAD comes the Ground-Based Midcourse
Defense system to intercept missiles in space (the
exoatmosphere).
On January 31 the U.S. Missile Defense Agency launched
a ground-based interceptor missile from the Vandenberg
Air Force Base in California in what proved to be an
unsuccessful test.
Four days before a local newspaper wrote that “A
missile-defense system test set for Sunday at
Vandenberg Air Force Base will involve a different
scenario, this time gauging how the system would react
to an Iran-like attack, officials said.”
The report further detailed “a target weapon set to
take off from the Kwajalein Atoll, about 4,200 miles
southwest of Vandenberg” and that “the launch will be
followed about 20 minutes later by a ground-based
interceptor launched from an underground silo on north
Vandenberg.” [9]
The last such test occurred in 2008 “when [a] target
launched from Kodiak, Alaska, was successfully hit by
a Vandenberg interceptor.” [10] Staging long-range
missile interception tests from Alaska, including from
the Aleutian Islands near Russia’s eastern coast, are
not limited to plans for Iran.
In mid-January head of the U.S. Missile Defense Agency
Lieutenant General Patrick O’Reilly visited Fort
Greely, Alaska, “the first line in America’s missile
defense” and home to ground-based midcourse missiles,
and his comments included: “In a time of war we would
launch.” [11] Missiles launched from Fort Greely would
have to pass over Russia, China or both to reach Iran,
incidentally.
News that the U.S. is to deploy a Patriot missile
battery in Poland close to its border led to Russia’s
ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin stating recently:
“Do they really think that we will calmly watch the
location of a rocket system, at a distance of 60 km
from Kaliningrad?” [12] The deployment of Standard
Missile-3s, with several times the reach of the
Patriot, on land and sea in the same neighborhood will
only makes matters more dangerous.
The official authorization of Patriot transfers to
Taiwan – the missiles are produced by Raytheon
Company, whose former vice president of Government
Operations and Strategy William Lynn is now Deputy
Secretary of Defense – resulted in China’s vice
foreign minister, He Yafei, saying “We believe this
move endangers China’s national security” [13] and to
Luo Yuan, senior researcher with the Academy of
Military Science, adding “The US action gives China a
justified cause to increase its national defense
expenditure, to enhance the development and purchase
of weapons, and to accelerate its modernization
process in national defense….China did nothing to
threaten the US, why should the US challenge our core
strategic interests?” [14]
China and Russia, by not capitulating to U.S. and
Western European pressure to enforce further, even
more onerous sanctions against Iran of the type that
have in recent years been followed by all-our war
against other nations, have frequently been chastised
by U.S. leaders, with China lately being dressed down
by U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, about whom
it cannot be said as President John Quincey Adams
claimed of the early American republic that “she goes
not abroad, in search of monsters to destroy.”
China has suspended military contacts with Washington
and threatened sanctions against American arms firms
involved in the completion of the $6.5 billion deal
with Taiwan.
With the release of the 2010 Quadrennial Defense
Review which calls for a record $708 billion in
Pentagon spending next year, Bloomberg News ran a
feature titled “China, Iran Prompt U.S. Air-Sea Battle
Plan in Strategy Review” which stated “The U.S.
military is drawing up a new air-sea battle plan in
response to threats such as China’s persistent
military build-up and Iran’s possession of advanced
weapons.” Pentagon chief Robert Gates was quoted as
alluding to – in an obvious reference to China – “the
military modernization programs of other countries”
and of the Quadrennial Defense Review in general that
“This is truly a wartime QDR.” [15]
“The budget underscored the administration’s
commitment to a ‘robust defense against emerging
missile threats,’ saying it would pay for use of
increasingly capable sea- and land-based missile
interceptors and a range of sensors in Europe.” [16]
The blatant provocations against Russia and China of
late last month are being repeated against Iran.
The Times of London on February 1 reminded its readers
that “The UAE and Saudi Arabia have bought more than
$25 billion of US arms in the past two years. Abu
Dhabi has bought $17 billion of US hardware since
2008, including Patriot anti-missile systems, while
the UAE as a whole recently bought 80 F16 jets.”
It also recalled, even more ominously, that “The
chairman of the US military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff,
Admiral Mike Mullen…said last month that the Pentagon
must have military options ready to counter Iran
should Mr Obama call for them.” [17]
An integral part of plans to contain and confront Iran
is the Pentagon buildup in and near the Persian Gulf.
Last year United Press International published a
report that “Middle Eastern countries are expected to
spend more than $100 billion over the next five
years….Most of the procurement will be carried out by
Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Iraq and
Israel….The core of this arms-buying spree will
undoubtedly be the $20 billion U.S. package of weapons
systems over 10 years for the six states of the Gulf
Cooperation Council – Saudi Arabia, the U.A.E.,
Kuwait, Oman, Qatar and Bahrain.” [18]
On January 27 in the United Arab Emirates “The UAE
Armed Forces [began] military training with the US
Central Command (Centcom) along with armed forces from
other GCC [Gulf Cooperation Council] and friendly
countries.” [19]
Last October and November the U.S. and Israel
conducted their largest-ever joint military exercise,
Juniper Cobra 2009, which tested five interceptor
missile systems in tandem. [20]
On September 17, while announcing plans to abandon
ground-based interceptor deployments in Poland in
favor of a broader stratified system in Europe based
initially on Patriot Advanced Capability-3 and Aegis
missiles, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in
reference to Iran and its neighbors that “the United
States has already formed a Gulf missile defense
network that consisted of PAC-3 and the Aegis
sea-based systems….The reality is we are working both
on a bilateral and a multilateral basis in the Gulf to
establish the same kind of regional missile defense
that would protect our facilities out there as well as
our friends and allies.”
He added: “We have very strong bilateral relationships
in developing missile defense with several of the
countries in the Gulf. And now what we’re encouraging
is to layer on top of that multilateral cooperation as
well.” [21]
What Gates was describing is a comprehensive missile
shield in the region that integrates all six Gulf
Cooperation Council (GCC) states into a single
interceptor grid linked with facilities and
deployments in Israel and Turkey (if the latter nation
permits it) and a continent-wide NATO system in
Europe.
The same source reported:
“Officials said the United Arab Emirates has been the
most advanced in plans to form a missile defense
umbrella. The UAE has ordered the Terminal High
Altitude Area Defense system, designed to destroy
nuclear missiles in the exoatmosphere. Over the last
two years, the Pentagon has been meeting GCC military
chiefs to discuss regional and national missile
defense programs….At the same time, the U.S. military
has been operating PAC-3 in Kuwait and Qatar. The U.S.
Army has also been helping Saudi Arabia upgrade its
PAC-2 fleet.” [22]
The Associated Press stated days after last
September’s announced change in U.S. global missile
shield plans – in which the “Obama administration
shift[ed] its focus on missile defense away from
Europe and toward the Middle East” – that “Between
2004 and last year, the Emirates bought more weapons
than any other country besides China and India,
according to the Stockholm International Peace
Research Institute. The majority of those arms came
from the U.S. Lockheed and partner Raytheon Corp. of
Waltham, Mass., are leading the push to strengthen the
Emirates’ missile defense systems….It is not the
region’s only U.S. ally to have placed such an order.
Saudi Arabia, Israel and Kuwait have all bought
Patriot and other missile shield systems….Abu Dhabi
is…pushing to become the first country after the U.S.
to deploy what Lockheed says is an even more advanced
missile defense system known as the Terminal High
Altitude Area Defense system, or THAAD….” [23]
William Lynn, the Pentagon’s second highest ranking
official and former lobbyist for the manufacturer of
Patriot missiles, Raytheon, delivered a speech in
Washington, D.C. On January 21, the contents of which
were reported as containing the demand to “put the
Defense Department on a permanent footing to fight
both low-intensity conflicts to maintaining air
dominance and the ability to strike any target on
Earth at any time….The next air warfare priority for
the Pentagon is developing a next-generation,
deep-penetrating strike capability that can overcome
advanced air defenses….” [24] The new Prompt Global
Strike system is designed to accomplish just those
last three objectives. [25]
Were a leading defense official of any other nation to
publicly promote that agenda the newspapers of the
world would report it and the Pentagon, State
Department and White House would not be silent on the
matter. The American media and the government alike
would condemn it for what it is: A threat to world
peace and to the world itself.
Notes
1) Wired, January 22, 2010
2) Ibid
3) New York Times, January 30, 2010
4) Wikipedia
5) OnMilwaukee, May 12, 2009
6) American Forces Press Service, February 24, 2010
7) Gulf Daily News, February 1, 2010
8) United Press International, August 25, 2009
9) Lompoc Record, January 27, 2010
10) Ibid
11) Alaska Dispatch, January 13, 2010
12) Radio Poland, January 29, 2010
13) New York Times, January 29, 2010
14) China Daily, February 1, 2010
15) Bloomberg News, February 1, 2010
16) Reuters, February 1, 2010
17) The Times, February 1, 2010
18) United Press International, August 25, 2009
19) Gulf News, January 27, 2010
20) Israel: Forging NATO Missile Shield, Rehearsing
War With Iran
Stop NATO, November 5, 2009
21) World Tribune, September 30, 2009
22) Ibid
23) Associated Press, September 23, 2009
24) Defense News, January 22, 2010
25) U.S. Accelerates First Strike Global Missile
Shield System
Stop NATO, August 19, 2009
Save
Add Comments To This Story