So, That's How the Old Dominion University Terrorist Was Able to Obtain a...
Yes, This NYT Headline Is Real...and They Appear to Have a Muslim Terrorist...
We Got Some More Manpower Heading to the Middle East
CNN's Kaitlin Collins Set Up Scott Jennings Perfectly to Torch the Biden Administration
My Word, Ms. Spanberger, What Fresh Hell Is This Tweet?
Victory for President Trump’s DOGE – ACLJ Amicus Brief Affirmed
Did We Avoid Another Terrorist Attack This Week? This Arrest in Texas Makes...
Globalize the Intifada? Authorities in the Netherlands Are Investigating Fire at Synagogue
What Can We Do About Islam in America?
Does Retaliation Against the United States Mean We Shouldn't Wage War Against Our...
Pete Hegseth Blasts Reports That the United States Did Not Plan on Iran...
All Six American Crewman Aboard Refueling Aircraft That Crashed in Iraq Confirmed Dead
Ex-Top Gun Pilot Says The Threat of Iranian Sleeper Cells 'Is Not a...
Even Obama's Former DHS Secretary Is Calling on Democrats to Fund DHS
Former Nevada County Commissioner Indicted in Alleged $500K COVID Relief Fraud
OPINION

Merry Christmas, Hawaii: U.S. Missile Defenses Just Improved

The opinions expressed by columnists are their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Townhall.com.
Merry Christmas, Hawaii: U.S. Missile Defenses Just Improved
AP Photo/Caleb Jones

Hawaii can rest a bit easier this Christmas, thanks to another successful Missile Defense Agency anti-ballistic missile test. On Nov. 16, an SM-3 Block IIA (SM3) missile fired by a U.S. Navy guided-missile destroyer, the USS John Finn, destroyed an "ICBM-representative target" as it plunged toward Hawaii. The SM3 is a kinetic interceptor, hit to kill. Its November kill was exo-atmospheric -- in near space.

Advertisement

The target missile had physical characteristics similar to North Korea's advanced ICBMs (intercontinental ballistic missiles). Launched from a site in the western Pacific, its flight trajectory mimicked a Nork shot at the Hawaiian Islands.

Anyone who dismisses Hawaiians' fear of attack should revisit the January 2018 false missile-attack alert issued by the Hawaii Emergency Management Agency. When the agency announced an attack was underway, many Hawaiians panicked. The public fright demonstrated rational people fear nuclear-armed missiles, especially when malign regimes threaten ICBM attacks.

Perhaps dismissive sophisticates have also forgotten the Dec. 7, 1941, attack on Pearl Harbor. The Pacific Ocean basin's geography today is the same as it was in 1941, and even in this age of ICBMs and cyber war, a naval base in Pearl Harbor remains key to controlling the central Pacific and projecting power into the western Pacific. That includes projecting power into China's coastal provinces.

Hawaii matters to American defense. So does Guam. So does Alaska, which is also within range of North Korean missiles. Canada and Mexico also matter.

The SM3 is small enough for the Navy's Aegis-type destroyers and cruisers to carry and launch. However, the anti-ballistic missiles require more advanced equipment than the standard Aegis ship. That's why the Navy designates the ABM vessels as ballistic missile defense (BMD) warships.

Advertisement

Related:

HAWAII

NATO deploys the SM3 in two on-land Aegis Ashore sites, one in Romania and one in Poland. Why? The answer: Iran.

The target ICBM the SM3 destroyed was the same type hit by the far larger Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) interceptors in tests conducted in May 2017 and March 2019. Until the SM3's success, the GMD and Israel's Arrow-3 were the world's only operational missile-defense systems capable of intercepting ICBMs.

This is more than good news for Hawaii. GMDs are launched from fixed silos. At the moment, only 44 of the big interceptors are deployed, so they are a thin shield. The SM3 is sea-based, which means it is something the GMD is not: mobile. Deploying BMD warships near the North American coast thickens continental defenses against a rogue nation's limited ICBM attack. The SM3 can also intercept an accidental launch.

In a developing crisis, deploying U.S. and allied BMD warships to protect a vulnerable country is a diplomatic counter to an aggressor threatening missile strikes.

Note that the SM3 has limitations. For an SM3 to get an exoatmospheric kill, the BMD warship or Aegis Ashore site must be positioned to intercept the missile warhead in the descent phase.

In my view, that makes the SM3 Block IIA a superb asset for providing tangible thin shield missile defense. Warships give the missile system strategic mobility. However, China and Russia possess more than ICBMs to overwhelm anti-missile capabilities. That means defending North America still requires nuclear deterrence.

Advertisement

But don't underrate missile defense, and definitely do not let the missile-defense deniers impose restraints on the development of anti-missile technologies. That happened during the Clinton administration.

The missile-defense deniers argue missile defenses increase instability. They have it backward. Defense improves security, which enhances stability.

In 2003, then-House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi opined: "The United States does not need a multibillion-dollar national missile defense against the possibility of a nuclear-armed ICBM. What we need is a strong nonproliferation policy with other nations to combat the most serious threat to our national security."

North Korea got the bomb; Iran still seeks one. The best nonproliferation policy has a strong diplomatic component, but it also includes capable missile defenses and a covert strike capability.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement