Columbia International Affairs Online: Working Papers

CIAO DATE: 04/2012

Developments and Implications of Missile Defence

Gustav Lindstrom

March 2012

The Geneva Centre for Security Policy

Abstract

On 9 December 2011, the Geneva Centre for Security Policy (GCSP) hosted a seminar entitled “Developments and Implications of Missile Defence”. The event was organized by the GCSP with the financial support of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs (FDFA). About fifty participants attended the event, representing government, international organizations, the think tank community, and academia. The seminar had four principal aims. They were to: * Examine recent developments in missile defence initiatives; * Gauge the potential consequences of missile defence on regional and global security trends; * Analyze the possible impact of missile defence developments on existing and future disarmament activities, including unintended consequences; and, * Offer preliminary findings of key issues that policymakers should be aware of as missile defence evolves. Four sessions tackled these issues and at least four key messages emerged from the discussions. First, there were divergences over the impact of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) as it evolves. As the Obama Administration’s new policy for missile defence of Europe, the EPAA represents the first step towards a more regional approach to missile defence that is based on proven technologies and can be adapted to changing threat perceptions. Several participants noted that the system was progressing well and in a transparent manner, with an initial operating capability reached in March 2010 when the USS Monterey was deployed to the Mediterranean Sea. Over time, the EPAA would result in a win-win situation for the United States, Russia, and NATO – especially if collaboration between the United States and Russia became feasible. Several other participants offered a different picture, arguing that the EPAA was evolving on an auto-pilot mode that would not necessarily adjust to changes in threat perceptions. Specifically, there was concern that the EPAA would go ahead with Phase III and IV regardless of the status of Iran’s missile and nuclear programme. Such a trajectory would be of concern to Russia, raising questions over whom the system is targeted at.