Within years of the signing of the MCTR (Missile Technology Control Regime) there seemed to be an open defiance even by the signing members to its vital stipulation: Limiting the capacity and range of the projectiles that can be exported to other countries. Russia and China had often been attacked by the West for their violation of the regime’s provisions. Neither the agreement nor the diplomacy had so far succeeded in keeping pace with the appetite of small countries for Rockets. Remember an ‘upper volta with rocket’s as an USSR with little development used to be called during Cold War period? Notwithstanding MCTR there were already 35 to 40 countries who had acquired some Ballistic Capacity, Missile Technology and had already assumed an alarming proportion clout defeating the very purpose of the MCTR.

From among the countries outside the regime, North Korea had been the most cynical proliferators — ready to sell and supply missile secrets or components to any one who pays. If North Korea has been the keenest missile exporter, Iran is one of the most enthusiastic buyers having shopped relentlessly for technology and components in Russia, China and Pakistan. Both Pakistan’s Ghouri Missiles designed to deliver its newly developed nuclear warheads and Iran’s Shahab-3 rocket tested a few years back are believed to be the copies of the North Korean prototype.

Iran is known to be working hard on a separate missile with 4000 KM range and believed to have fired sea based missiles. Under the UN sanction Iraq was supposed to have destroyed its arsenal of Soviet built Skud Missiles and is now barred from having rocket with range of not more than 150 KM. It is however feared that it still has several dozens of Skuds and can make longer range device if the sanction is lifted.

But for the moment, it is particularly the North Korean missiles which have been the most worrisome to the panicked US and its allies in the pacific. North Korea already alarmed the American allies in the region by lobbing a rocket over Japan Sea a few years back. Now she is threatening, at least theoretically, even the US itself by getting ready to test missiles that can range wise hit Alaska. It is learnt that by using smaller warhead the same missile will be able to reach California.

Iran is also assembling new multi range missiles that could reach most of Europe. It already claims to have deployed in considerable number of missile that can hit Israel and part of Turkey. However, it does not necessarily mean that just by possessing capability North Korea would carry out missile attacks in the US and her allies in East Asia or Iran would take on targets on Europe or elsewhere because, that cannot but invite dirtier retaliation.

Nonetheless, in Western perception the rockets in the hand of ‘rogue regime’ often well connected with increasingly defiant Russia and China do pose immediate danger to American allies in the Middle East, Asia and elsewhere — if not directly to the US. So there is a perceptible urge for an international network of anti-missile protection. Since North Korea’s missile testing in Japan Sea, Japan and the US were considering how to construct a Joint Anti-Missile shield presumably based on Aeges Rader system which both of their Navies use.

South Korea wants to expand the scope of the missiles that it deploys against the country’s northern foe. Taiwan panicked by China’s missile brandishing in 1996 along the strait wants to buy any anti-missile defence the US can offer. A missile tracking system that was good enough for Japan only would now cover a much wider area. In addition, the creation of an American dominated anti-missile shield is also in the offing. It will include radar ships, interceptors and possibly Air borne lasers covering much of the pacific. Taiwan is also trying to be included in the network.

Even in the US every piece of bad news from the proliferation of recent nuclear test by both India and Pakistan as well as the steadily growing range of Iranian and North Korean rockets tended to harden opinion in favour of spending more money on ballistic missile defence since the Reagan Presidency’s star war project designed to break the ‘balance of terror with USSR by covering America with an anti-missile shield. However, the issue was intensely divisive.

In an airmated debate within America, to the democrats the proposition of a missile defence was at the best a gift to the arms industry and at the worst a provocation to Russia which seldom had a charitable view of it. The Republican described it as the vital protection for American Soldiers abroad and American families at home. The Clinton Administration tried to balance Russian sensitivity to mounting pressure from American hawks to do something about increasing missile threat. The result was a decision to immediately build upon a modest anti-missile shield over America. However, it did not placate either the Republicans or the Russians, who were furious and threatened to perfect there strategic nuclear force in response.

According to the US administration’s decision at least seven systems designed to neutralise incoming missiles were developed by Pentagon at an exorbitant cost. Since the Reagan era’s star war project a vision of a shield over entire United States already existed. At the other extreme lies the vision of an impermeable Umbrella over fifty states of the country were catered whether it was cost effective or not. But today when a rational missile defence is envisioned it usually points to a more modest shield able to ward off a few missiles from a few sources and not a massive missile attack by USSR as it used to be feared.

Somewhere between these two extremes lies what has come to be called ‘theatre defences’ designed to protect-overseas garrisons only from medium range missiles like those being tested in North Korea now. The defence will however be more sophisticated than PAC-3, the earlier version of which was tested in Gulf War by countering the incoming missile right in the space. The rockets are ideal for interception when they are of longer range and higher speed.

One of these intermediate systems known as THAD (Theatre High Altitude Area Defence) is a pet project of the US Army. It is hit to kill vehicle designed to vaporise the rocket with a head on blow. In the meantime, Israeli Aircraft Industries with US financial help has produced Arrow weapon system for the same purpose. Both in Israel and elsewhere there are however articulate group of skeptics who believe that missile system anywhere are irresponsible waste of money and it can only provide a false sense of security.

However, being unable to invent an ultimate weapon to annihilate each other the super powers decided to put a cap on their competition and in 1972 signed the ABM treaty on the premise that their was no solution for the threats emanating from the combination of nuclear weapon and ballistic missile.

Brig (retd) M Abdul Hafiz is a former DG of BIISS.