Long range ballistic missile defense in europe

pages

Français

Documents

Écrit par
Rl34051

Publié par
jjggi

Lire un extrait

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus

Découvre YouScribe et accède à tout notre catalogue !

Je m'inscris

Découvre YouScribe et accède à tout notre catalogue !

Je m'inscris

pages

Français

Documents

Lire un extrait

Obtenez un accès à la bibliothèque pour le consulter en ligne En savoir plus

Publié par

jjggi

Langue

Français

Publié par

jjggi

Langue

Français

Long-Range Ballistic Missile Defense in Europe

Steven A. Hildreth Specialist in Missile Defense

Carl Ek Specialist in International Relations

September 23, 2009

CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress

Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL34051

Long-Range Ballistic Missile Defense in Europe

Summary In early 2007, after several years of internal discussions and consultations with Poland and the Czech Republic, the Bush Administration formally proposed deploying a ground-based mid-course defense (GMD) element in Europe of the larger Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) to defend against an Iranian missile threat. The system would have included 10 interceptors in Poland, a radar in the Czech Republic, and another radar deployed in a country closer to Iran, all to be completed by 2013 at a reported cost of at least $4 billion. The proposed European BMD capability raised a number of foreign policy challenges in Europe and with Russia. On September 17, 2009, the Obama Administration announced it would cancel the Bush-proposed European BMD program. Instead, Defense Secretary Gates announced U.S. plans to develop and deploy a regional BMD capability that can be deployed around the world on relatively short notice during crises or as the situation may demand. Gates argued this new capability, based primarily around current BMD sensors and interceptors, would be more responsive and adaptable to growing concern over the direction of Iranian short- and medium-range ballistic missile proliferation. This capability would continue to evolve and expand over the next decade. This report is updated for Senate consideration of the defense appropriations bill (H.R. 3326) currently planned for the week of September 21, 2009. There are some reports that the issue of the European 3rdsite will be considered during Senate floor debate. Although the terms of the debate over the Bush-proposed European BMD capability have changed significantly, this report will be retained for historical purposes to include background information and analysis up to the Obama Administration’s decision to cancel it. It will be updated as necessary.

Congressional Research Service

Long-Range Ballistic Missile Defense in Europe

Contents Recent Developments..................................................................................................................1 Historical Background ................................................................................................................ 3 The Obama Administration...................................................................................................3 The Threat .................................................................................................................................. 4 The Bush-Proposed System......................................................................................................... 6 The Location...............................................................................................................................9 Poland...................................................................................................................................9 Czech Republic ................................................................................................................... 12 Policy Issues ............................................................................................................................. 15 Debate in Poland and the Czech Republic ........................................................................... 15 European/Russian Response................................................................................................16 Congressional Actions............................................................................................................... 23 Fiscal Year 2010..................................................................................................................23 Fiscal Year 2009..................................................................................................................24 Fiscal Year 2008..................................................................................................................25 Contacts Author Contact Information......................................................................................................27

Congressional Research Service

Voir