RubiconNZ
The Wanderer
GOPAL RATNAM
The threat of U.S. cities being attacked by cruise missiles launched from commercial ships is becoming a “front-burner” issue in Washington, said a Missile Defense Agency official.
The threat first identified by the 1998 Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, also known as the Rumsfeld Commission, led by Donald Rumsfeld, has been on the back-burner for a while but is now assuming importance with Congress asking for more studies and the MDA showing strong interest in the threat, said Ben Stubenberg, chief of analysis and scenarios at the MDA.
Stubenberg was speaking at the 2006 Cruise Missile & IED Defense Conference: Joint Engagement of Time-Critical Air & Ground Targets, sponsored by the Defense News Media Group, in Arlington, Va.
Missiles fired off commercial ships at U.S. cities would offer the same advantage that improvised explosive devices (IEDs) do in the hands of insurgents in Iraq: great strength at a low cost to take on a mighty military, Stubenberg said.
With nearly 1,000 commercial vessels sailing within 200 nautical miles of the U.S. coast every 24 hours the potential for a rogue vessel to slip in unnoticed was high, he said.
As U.S. immigration and border control measures have been tightened since Sept. 11, the attractiveness for potential adversaries of attacking major American cities without having to breach the airport security to plant a suicide bomber is high, he said.
Offering a hypothetical example, Stubenberg said a ship could leave a small, unnoticed port in Southeast Asia — one of nearly 11,000 ports that are not rigorously monitored — and head straight across the Pacific Ocean to the port of Ensenada, another small port in Mexico, within missile range of downtown Los Angeles, all the time avoiding the rigorous procedures that cargo ships heading to major U.S. ports must follow.
Once the hypothetical ship is in waters off Ensenada, a missile fired from there could easily target downtown Los Angeles and cause tremendous damage, he said.
Though adversaries would have to deal with challenges of adapting a cruise missile for a sea-based role and ensuring guidance and navigation systems, the easy availability of disgruntled former military officials who, as in the case of Iraq, have handled missiles and guidance systems in their professional careers, could mean that such challenges may be overcome, he said.
The black market in rockets, missiles and the proliferation of launch expertise could make it easier for adversaries to acquire the key technologies, he said.
Deploying a coastal network of sensors and interceptors to shoot down missiles, beefing up intelligence gathering so potential rogue vessels can be neutralized before they reach U.S. shores and some expansion of U.S. missile defense capabilities are possible solutions, he said.
Though the MDA is interested in examining the notion of a missile on board a commercial vessel as part of understanding the asymmetric threat, cruise missile defense is not yet part of the agency’s portfolio, he said.
The U.S. Strategic Command has just assumed responsibility for integrating the cruise missile defense efforts being carried out by different military services.
DefenseNews.com
Any expansion of ideas, on how to deal with this threat. I mean it would be absolutely hard to get a serious defence in place, Sea Ram on Sky scrapers or port facilities? Off Shore Customs platforms for inspection of foreign vessels, Coast Guard Pilots and Security Detachment on each incoming Foreign Vessel, or a Maritime Exclusion zone with corridors of transport protected by Surface vessels. Those would be my ideas but the cost would be ridiculous.
The threat of U.S. cities being attacked by cruise missiles launched from commercial ships is becoming a “front-burner” issue in Washington, said a Missile Defense Agency official.
The threat first identified by the 1998 Commission to Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States, also known as the Rumsfeld Commission, led by Donald Rumsfeld, has been on the back-burner for a while but is now assuming importance with Congress asking for more studies and the MDA showing strong interest in the threat, said Ben Stubenberg, chief of analysis and scenarios at the MDA.
Stubenberg was speaking at the 2006 Cruise Missile & IED Defense Conference: Joint Engagement of Time-Critical Air & Ground Targets, sponsored by the Defense News Media Group, in Arlington, Va.
Missiles fired off commercial ships at U.S. cities would offer the same advantage that improvised explosive devices (IEDs) do in the hands of insurgents in Iraq: great strength at a low cost to take on a mighty military, Stubenberg said.
With nearly 1,000 commercial vessels sailing within 200 nautical miles of the U.S. coast every 24 hours the potential for a rogue vessel to slip in unnoticed was high, he said.
As U.S. immigration and border control measures have been tightened since Sept. 11, the attractiveness for potential adversaries of attacking major American cities without having to breach the airport security to plant a suicide bomber is high, he said.
Offering a hypothetical example, Stubenberg said a ship could leave a small, unnoticed port in Southeast Asia — one of nearly 11,000 ports that are not rigorously monitored — and head straight across the Pacific Ocean to the port of Ensenada, another small port in Mexico, within missile range of downtown Los Angeles, all the time avoiding the rigorous procedures that cargo ships heading to major U.S. ports must follow.
Once the hypothetical ship is in waters off Ensenada, a missile fired from there could easily target downtown Los Angeles and cause tremendous damage, he said.
Though adversaries would have to deal with challenges of adapting a cruise missile for a sea-based role and ensuring guidance and navigation systems, the easy availability of disgruntled former military officials who, as in the case of Iraq, have handled missiles and guidance systems in their professional careers, could mean that such challenges may be overcome, he said.
The black market in rockets, missiles and the proliferation of launch expertise could make it easier for adversaries to acquire the key technologies, he said.
Deploying a coastal network of sensors and interceptors to shoot down missiles, beefing up intelligence gathering so potential rogue vessels can be neutralized before they reach U.S. shores and some expansion of U.S. missile defense capabilities are possible solutions, he said.
Though the MDA is interested in examining the notion of a missile on board a commercial vessel as part of understanding the asymmetric threat, cruise missile defense is not yet part of the agency’s portfolio, he said.
The U.S. Strategic Command has just assumed responsibility for integrating the cruise missile defense efforts being carried out by different military services.
DefenseNews.com
Any expansion of ideas, on how to deal with this threat. I mean it would be absolutely hard to get a serious defence in place, Sea Ram on Sky scrapers or port facilities? Off Shore Customs platforms for inspection of foreign vessels, Coast Guard Pilots and Security Detachment on each incoming Foreign Vessel, or a Maritime Exclusion zone with corridors of transport protected by Surface vessels. Those would be my ideas but the cost would be ridiculous.