|
Banned
|
 |
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: incoherant
|
|
Dec 2nd, 2004, 08:00 PM
[/quote]What does that link have to do with what you said above?
Quote:
After watching it the new's came on talking about Bush and his comments about Canada joining in on the Missile defense.
|
Also, in the original post, the first paragraph is yours, and the next two are a quote of something, aren't they?
Quote:
Read the News Release:
Canada-U.S. Exchange Letters On Missile Defence (January 15, 2004)
CANADA AND BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENCE
Discussions with the United States on possible Canadian participation in the Ballistic Missile Defence of North America.
I. Background
In accordance with the 1994 Defence White Paper, Canada has held regular consultations on Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) with the United States and other allies in recent years, both bilaterally and through the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO). Canada and the United States established a BMD Bilateral Information Sharing Working Group that has met twice a year since 2000. In addition, Canada placed a Canadian Forces Liaison Officer with the US Missile Defense Agency in early 2001 for the purpose of supporting the ongoing consultation and information exchange process.
On December 17, 2002 a major development occurred in US BMD policy. President George W. Bush announced that the United States would deploy an initial operational BMD system for the defence of North America by the fall of 2004. This announcement prompted Canada to review its position on BMD and its implications for continental security.
On May 29, 2003 the Government announced that it would enter into discussions with the United States on possible Canadian participation in the missile defence of North America. The key issues for Canada were identified as protecting Canadians, Canadian territory and other Canadian interests. Since that time Canadian and US delegations have met on a number of occasions at various levels.
On January 15, 2004 the Minister of National Defence and the US Secretary of Defense exchanged Letters of Intent, stating the interest of both nations in negotiating an agreement on cooperation in the ballistic missile defence of North America. The Letters confirm high-level US support for potential Canadian participation in BMD and will facilitate access to more detailed information on missile defence planning.
The Letters of Intent do not constitute an agreement between Canada and the United States on Canadian participation in BMD. The exchange is a non-binding mechanism developed by both nations to facilitate further talks on BMD. When the discussions have concluded, the Government will assess if Canadian interests have been met and will take a decision on Canadian participation in BMD. Due to the complexities of the issues at stake, these talks are expected to take a number of months.
The Letters of Intent also refer to an interim amendment to the North American Aerospace Defence Command (NORAD) Agreement. This amendment will be developed in the coming months. Its purpose is to give Canadian NORAD personnel access to critical BMD planning information until the system's deployment in October 2004.
II. US Plans for a BMD System
Brief History: The United States has been researching BMD since the 1940s, briefly deploying a system in the mid-1970s. President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) of the 1980's revived the concept of ballistic missile defence. However, SDI was based on exotic space technologies and was intended to counter the entire nuclear arsenal of the Soviet Union. Technological challenges, high cost-estimates, and the end of the Cold War halted SDI.
Responding to the changing strategic environment and the proliferation of ballistic missile systems and weapons of mass destruction, President Clinton agreed in principle in the mid-1990s to the need for BMD. The National Missile Defense Act of 1999 stated that a modest ground-based missile defence system would be deployed as soon as the technology permitted. At this time the United States attempted to continue developing BMD plans while remaining consistent with the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty.
In 2002, believing that the international strategic environment had deteriorated further and that the ABM Treaty was outmoded, the United States negotiated an end to the treaty with Russia in order to permit the expansion of missile defences. The United States argued that the Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) doctrine was no longer appropriate in a world of asymmetric threats and where an increasing number of countries are acquiring and seeking to acquire ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction.
Current US Plans: The US objective is to develop the capability to defend its territory, deployed American forces, and its friends and allies from hostile or accidentally launched ballistic missiles. The system, which will initially provide only limited capability to protect North America, will be ground- and sea-based, starting with ten missile interceptors in 2004, increasing up to forty by 2005. Interceptors would destroy their targets by making physical contact with them at extremely high rates of speed (not using nuclear or conventional explosive warheads). Unlike SDI of the 1980s, the BMD system to be deployed in 2004 is intended to defeat only a small number of incoming missiles. It is not intended, nor would it have the capability, to counter the Russian strategic arsenal.
Long-range US BMD plans envision a 'layered' approach to intercepting missiles by using land (large interceptor rockets or mobile launchers such as the current US 'Patriot' system), sea ('Aegis' class missile ships), and air (airborne laser) platforms to shoot down incoming missiles. Air- and sea-based platforms can be positioned close to the launch site to intercept a hostile missile during its 'boost phase' (the period just after a missile's launch). Land-based platforms are better at intercepting missiles during the 'mid-course phase' (when the missile is coasting through space or high in the atmosphere) and 'terminal phase' (when the missile makes its final approach toward its intended target). The 2004 deployment focusses on the 'mid-course phase', with interceptor sites in Alaska and California.
The US is continuing to research space-based weapons technology, but has made no decision on fielding such systems. The cost and technological challenges of space weapons means that such systems will likely be many years away from deployment, if ever.
BMD Tests: Testing of the ballistic missile defence system in recent months and years has had mixed results: five of eight tests of long-range interceptors have succeeded. Testing is gaining in complexity and precision, integrating multifaceted systems as well as improving the capability to intercept targets. The United States is committed to providing the resources and the effort to ensure that an effective system is developed. This includes integrating new technologies as they become available and continually upgrading the BMD system at two-year intervals.
Pending Decisions: In order to meet the fall 2004 deadline, the US has already begun to make far-reaching decisions regarding command structures and the overall architecture of the system. Of particular concern to Canada, US decision-making will likely have an impact on the future role of NORAD.
Since its formation in 1958, NORAD has been the mainstay of Canada's aerospace defence and control capability. First conceived to deal with the strategic bomber threat of the Cold War, NORAD evolved to track and warn North America of attack by aircraft, missiles, and space vehicles. Significant overlap exists between NORAD's threat tracking and assessment mission and the missile defence mission assigned to the US-only Northern Command (NORTHCOM), which is co-located with NORAD in Colorado Springs. Many US NORTHCOM personnel, including the commander, are at the same time 'double-hatted' as NORAD personnel.
Other forthcoming US decisions on BMD that may have an impact on Canada concern research, development, and industrial activity. Missile defence is one of the largest research and development programs in the US, with an annual budget of approximately $9 billion (US) in 2004.
III. Canada and Ballistic Missile Defence
Canada shares many US and NATO concerns about the proliferation of ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction. Proliferation, combined with the changing character of international terrorism, is creating a more dangerous and complex security environment, both at home and abroad.
Although the ballistic missile threat to Canada is currently considered low, joint Canadian and American intelligence estimates suggest that in coming years the range and accuracy of ballistic missile technology available to proliferators will improve, weapons of mass destruction proliferation will continue, and the threat to Canada and Canadian interests could increase. In addition, Canada and the United States have for generations cooperated on the joint defence of the continent to our mutual benefit.
Canada also has a comprehensive approach to addressing ballistic missile proliferation, based on diplomatic engagement with proliferators, strong national export controls on missile-related technology, membership in the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR), support for the Hague Code of Conduct on ballistic missiles, and examination of potential defensive capabilities. Through this approach, we seek to address the threats posed by the proliferation of missile technology, especially missiles capable of delivering weapons of mass destruction, in a manner that also reflects Canada's longstanding policies on arms control, disarmament, and strategic stability. Canada respects and fulfills its international non-proliferation obligations, and will continue to do so.
Complementing these efforts to halt the proliferation and use of missile delivery systems, Canada remains active in working to control the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction that could be employed as warheads for such weapons. The Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty forms the foundation of Canada's nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation policy. Canada continues to play an active role in strengthening this cornerstone of strategic stability. Canada has also been very active in the development, universalization, and implementation of the 1975 Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention, as well as the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention.
More recently, Canada has begun devoting considerable resources to supporting the G8 Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction. Through this initiative, Canada will focus on working closely with its G8 partners, including Russia, to assist Russian authorities to secure the destruction of chemical weapons, dismantle nuclear submarines, ensure the safe disposition of nuclear fissile materials, and find employment for former weapons scientists.
The Government holds consultations with Parliamentarians, security and defence experts, interested non-governmental organizations, and interested Canadians. The Minister of Foreign Affairs heard the views of Canadians on missile defence during the 'town hall' meetings he attended as part of the Foreign Policy Dialogue. The Department of National Defence convened missile defence forums with expert stakeholders, as well as a number of focus groups on the issue of North American defence. The Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Trade (SCFAIT) made a recommendation on missile defence in its December 2002 report and heard further evidence on BMD in June, 2003.
IV. International Perspectives on BMD
International reaction to the US announcement that it would field a BMD system in 2004 has been varied. The United States has been active in engaging allies and others to explain what the system is intended to do and to open itself to international cooperation. A number of nations have come forward to express their interest in BMD, both in terms of participating in the system or in terms of research, development, and industrial opportunities.
NATO: The Alliance has been addressing the threat of short-range missiles for almost a decade. NATO countries have broadened their examination of missile defence by launching a new NATO missile defence study on November 3, 2003, to prepare a threat assessment on missile proliferation, and to look at options for protecting Alliance territory, forces, and population centres against the full range of missile threats. Aside from these Alliance activities, some of the Allies are looking at their own national missile defence needs. Two examples are the US-German-Italian MEADS medium-range missile defence programme, and the French ASTER missile defence programme.
United Kingdom: The United Kingdom has been supportive of US efforts to develop missile defences. In February, 2003 the United Kingdom finalized an agreement with the US on upgrading RAF Station Fylingdales radar site for the purposes of the ballistic missile defence system. Moreover, the UK government also signed a Memorandum of Understanding with the United States on BMD, which, as Minister of Defence Geoffrey Hoon stated in Parliament,
"facilitates bilateral information exchanges on missile defence matters, establishes a top-level management structure to oversee cooperative work, and prepares the way for fair opportunities to be given to UK industry to participate in the US programme."
This was complemented by the creation of a UK Missile Defence Centre to interface with the US Missile Defense Agency.
Denmark: Another key European nation in US BMD planning is Denmark. In December, 2002 the United States formally requested that Denmark consider allowing the upgrade of the US radar site in Thule, Greenland for use in BMD. Negotiations on upgrading Thule are ongoing, involving both Denmark and the Greenland home rule government. Upgrading the Thule facility, however, would not imply the participation of Denmark itself in the US BMD system.
Japan: Japan has been involved in discussions on BMD with the United States for many years. It currently has joint BMD programmes with the United States, though their systems function independently. On December 19, 2003 the Japanese government announced it would begin building a missile defence system, to be deployed between 2007-2011. Japan will acquire a layered missile defence system, using naval ships to engage an incoming missile during its mid-course phase, with shorter range ground-based Patriot Advanced Capability (PAC-3) missiles providing point defence.
Australia: The government of Australia announced on December 4, 2003 its intention to participate in US BMD. Although the exact nature of Australian-US BMD cooperation is yet to be specified, it will most likely entail early warning, ship- and ground-based sensors, and research and development.
Israel: Like Japan, Israel has been actively engaged in BMD programmes with the United States for many years. The US 'Patriot' short-range missile defence system was deployed in Israel during the Gulf War, with mixed reports of success. Israel has subsequently developed in conjunction with the United States the 'Arrow' system. The Arrow was deployed in 2002, and operates alongside PAC-3 installations at strategic sites around Israel.
India: India has expressed interest in BMD cooperation with the United States, cooperation which could have implications for stability in the region. India has recently proposed to buy PAC-3 anti-missile systems.
Russia: Russia initially voiced serious concerns over US plans for BMD for two main reasons:
1) that BMD would counteract the Russian strategic missile threat, and 2) that the US decision to withdraw from the ABM Treaty could destabilise the arms control regime. The signing in May 2002 of the Strategic Offensive Reductions Treaty (SORT), which obligated both nations to reduce their strategic arsenals by two-thirds, seems to have limited the potential negative repercussions of the end of the ABM Treaty.
Although it continues to have concerns about the impact of BMD, Russia has been discussing BMD cooperation with the United States and with NATO. Discussions with NATO are the more advanced, as Russia has declared itself willing to cooperate with NATO in Theatre Missile Defence (defence against short-range ballistic missiles). Russia has also expressed interest in technical and industrial cooperation in US BMD. As part of the May 2002 Joint Declaration on the New Strategic Relationship, the United States agreed to assist in improving Russia's missile early-warning coverage through the establishment of a joint ballistic missile launch information-sharing centre, and in continuing to develop the Russian-American Observation Satellite warning system.
China: China is believed to have concerns about the viability of its own very limited strategic deterrence in light of US BMD planning. China is also concerned BMD will lead to the weaponisation of space and has worked with Russia to advance these concerns in the UN Conference on Disarmament. The most recent annual US review of Chinese military power noted that China has been modernising its missile systems in number and quality, although such activities have been under way for at least a decade. The US decision to sell PAC-3 missiles (for short-range missile defence) to Taiwan and US-Japanese cooperation on BMD have touched on Chinese regional interests.
V. Conclusion
The Government entered into discussions with the United States on possible Canadian participation in BMD after years of consultations. The primary aim of these discussions has been to establish whether or not participation in BMD could enhance Canadian security. It is only responsible that the Government examine possible BMD participation, especially in light of the US administration's announcement in 2002 of its intent to deploy an initial system in fall 2004, bringing the concept to reality.
It is in Canada's strategic and national interest to be involved in decisions concerning the security and defence of North America. Being engaged with the United States on BMD early, when key operational and command decisions are being made, would increase the ability of Canada to have meaningful involvement in the system as it develops. Talks with the United States on BMD to date have been constructive and informative. The Government will take a decision on participation in BMD after these discussions are complete.
The Government is committed to ensuring and enhancing the security of Canada and Canadians. Examining possible Canadian participation in the Ballistic Missile Defence of North America is one aspect of meeting this commitment.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Last Updated:
2004-07-19
Top of Page Important Notices
|
| |
| |
|
|
I sent to Max and wanted his opinion but I will post it here to see what you guy's think.
Linear Mode
