View source for Anti-ballistic missile

{{short description|Surface-to-air missile designed to counter ballistic missiles}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2020}}
[[File:OBV GBI 1.jpg|thumb|right|A [[Ground-Based Interceptor]] of the United States' [[Ground-Based Midcourse Defense]] system, loaded into a silo at [[Fort Greely]], Alaska, in July 2004]]
An '''anti-ballistic missile''' ('''ABM''') is a [[surface-to-air missile]] designed to counter [[ballistic missile]]s (missile defense). Ballistic missiles are used to deliver [[nuclear weapon|nuclear]], [[Chemical weapon|chemical]], [[Bioagent|biological]], or [[conventional weapon|conventional]] [[warhead]]s in a [[ballistics|ballistic]] flight [[trajectory]]. The term "anti-ballistic missile" is a generic term for a system designed to intercept and destroy any type of ballistic threat; however, it is commonly used for systems specifically designed to counter [[intercontinental ballistic missile]]s (ICBMs).
==Current counter-ICBM systems==
[[File:Arrow-3 Jan-03-2013 (c).jpg|thumb|Israel's [[Arrow 3]]]]
There are a limited number of systems worldwide that can intercept [[intercontinental ballistic missile]]s:{{Efn|Besides these, some smaller systems exist (tactical ABMs) that generally cannot intercept intercontinental strategic missiles, as they move too fast for these systems.{{citation needed|date=July 2017}}}}
* The Russian [[A-135 anti-ballistic missile system]] (upgraded in 2017 to A-235)<ref name=":2">{{Cite journal |last1=ARBATOV |first1=ALEXEY |last2=DVORKIN |first2=VLADIMIR |last3=TOPYCHKANOV |first3=PETR |last4=ZHAO |first4=TONG |last5=BIN |first5=LI |date=2017 |title=ENTANGLEMENT AS A NEW SECURITY THREAT: A RUSSIAN PERSPECTIVE |journal=Entanglement |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/resrep26908.6 |pages=11–46}}</ref> is used for the defense of [[Moscow]]. It became operational in 1995 and was preceded by the [[A-35 anti-ballistic missile system]]. The system uses [[ABM-4 Gorgon|Gorgon]] and [[Gazelle (missile)|Gazelle]] missiles previously armed with [[nuclear warhead]]s. These missiles have been updated (2017) and use non-nuclear kinetic interceptors instead, to intercept any incoming ICBMs.<ref name=":2" />
* The Israeli [[Arrow 3]] system entered operational service in 2017. It is designed for exo-atmosphere interception of ballistic missiles during the [[spaceflight]] portion of their trajectory, including those of ICBMs.<ref name=is>[http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Israel-successfully-tests-Davids-Slings-interceptor Israel successfully tests David's Sling's interceptor] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130509060922/http://www.jpost.com/Defense/Israel-successfully-tests-Davids-Slings-interceptor |date=9 May 2013 }} By Yaakov Lappin. Jpost.com, 25 November 2012</ref> It may also act as an anti-satellite weapon.
* The American [[Ground-Based Midcourse Defense]] (GMD) system, formerly known as [[National Missile Defense]] (NMD), was first tested in 1997 and had its first successful intercept test in 1999. Instead of using an explosive charge, it launches a hit-to-kill [[kinetic projectile]] to intercept an ICBM. The current GMD system is intended to shield the United States mainland against a limited nuclear attack by a [[rogue state]] such as North Korea. GMD does not have the ability to protect against an all-out nuclear attack from Russia, as there are currently only 44 ground-based interceptors available to counter projectiles headed towards the US.<ref name="economist,0">{{Cite news |url=https://www.economist.com/news/united-states/21734465-someone-ought-explain-commander-chief-there-no-guaranteed-defence |title=There is no guaranteed defence against ballistic missiles—yet |newspaper=The Economist |language=en |access-date=28 January 2018 |url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://missilethreat.csis.org/system/gmd/ |title=Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) System |website=Missile Threat}}</ref> (This interceptor count does not include the THAAD, or Aegis, or Patriot defenses which provide shorter range defence against incoming projectiles.)
* The [[Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System|Aegis ballistic missile defense]]-equipped [[RIM-161 Standard Missile 3|SM-3 Block II-A]] missile demonstrated it can shoot down an ICBM target on 16 Nov 2020.<ref name= aegisSm3BlockIia >[https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2417334/us-successfully-conducts-sm-3-block-iia-intercept-test-against-an-intercontinen/ FTM-44 (17 Nov 2020) U.S. Successfully Conducts SM-3 Block IIA Intercept Test Against an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Target] Flight Test Aegis Weapon System-44 (FTM-44). The [[C2BMC]] network detected an ICBM launch; U.S. Navy sailors aboard the USS John Finn (DDG-113) then launched an SM-3 Block IIA missile which destroyed the ICBM in mid-course.</ref>
**In a November 2020 test, the US launched a surrogate ICBM from [[Kwajalein Atoll]] toward [[Hawaii]] in the general direction of the continental US, which triggered a [[C2BMC|satellite warning]] to a Colorado Air Force base.<ref name= ftm44 /> In response, {{USS|John Finn}} launched a missile which destroyed the surrogate ICBM, while still outside the atmosphere.<ref name= ftm44 >[https://www.mda.mil/video/FTM44PostMissionVideo2.mp4  MDA (18 Nov 2020) FTM-44 mission overview]{{Dead link|date=August 2024 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }} 20-MDA-10624 (Not to scale nor in real time)</ref><ref name=":1">{{Cite news|last=Kluth|first=Andreas|date=2020-11-29|title=A Successful U.S. Missile Intercept Ends the Era of Nuclear Stability|language=en|work=Bloomberg.com|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-11-30/a-successful-u-s-missile-intercept-ends-the-era-of-nuclear-stability|access-date=2020-11-30}}</ref><!--
PLEASE place minor info, such as SAM missiles that potentially can have limited ABM capability, at the country sections located in further part of article; this part is for short summary of OPERATIONAL SYSTEMS that can shoot down INTERCONTINENTAL ballistic missiles. -->
===American plans for Central European site===
{{further|National missile defense#Recent developments}}
During 1993, a symposium was held by western European nations to discuss potential future ballistic missile defence programs. In the end, the council recommended deployment of early warning and surveillance systems as well as regionally controlled defence systems.<ref>Assembly of the [[Western European Union]]. Technological and Aerospace Committee. Lenzer. via FAS.[https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/europe/weu_93/weu1363tasc.htm Anti-missile defence for Europe – guidelines drawn from the symposium] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151015200451/http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/europe/weu_93/weu1363tasc.htm |date=15 October 2015 }}. 17 May 1993.</ref>
During spring 2006 reports about negotiations between the United States, Poland, and the Czech Republic were published.<ref name="MDA Intl Coop" />
The plans propose the installation of a latest generation ABM system with a radar site in the Czech Republic and the [[U.S. missile defense complex in Poland|launch site in Poland]].<ref name="MDA Intl Coop" /> The system was announced to be aimed against ICBMs from Iran and North Korea.<ref name="MDA Intl Coop" /> This caused harsh comments by Russian [[President of Russia|President]] [[Vladimir Putin]] at the [[Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe]] (OSCE) security conference during spring 2007 in Munich. Other European ministers commented that any change of strategic weapons should be negotiated on [[NATO]] level and not 'unilaterally' [sic, actually bilaterally] between the U.S. and other states (although most strategic arms reduction treaties were between the Soviet Union and U.S., not NATO). The German foreign minister [[Frank-Walter Steinmeier]], a Social Democrat, expressed severe concerns about the way in which the U.S. had conveyed its plans to its European partners and criticised the U.S. administration for not having consulted Russia prior to announcing its endeavours to deploy a new missile defence system in Central Europe.<ref>Gaspers, J. (2007). [https://web.archive.org/web/20080910223745/http://www.hsfk.de/fileadmin/content-ABM/Natolin_Analiza_7_2007.pdf A US Missile Defence Shield in Europe? Opinions and Arguments in the German Political Debate. Natolin Analyses 7(20)/2007].</ref> According to a July 2007 survey, a majority of Poles were opposed to hosting a component of the system in Poland.<ref name="wp_antimissile">{{cite news | language=pl | title=55% Polaków przeciw budowie tarczy (55% of Poles against building the Shield) | date=17 July 2007 | publisher=[[Polska Agencja Prasowa]] | url=http://wiadomosci.wp.pl/wiadomosc.html?kat=1342&wid=9029388&ticaid=146b1 | access-date=7 September 2007 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120120062339/http://wiadomosci.wp.pl/wiadomosc.html?kat=1342&wid=9029388&ticaid=146b1 | archive-date=20 January 2012 | url-status=live }}</ref>
By 28 July 2016 [[Missile Defense Agency]] planning and agreements<ref name="MDA Intl Coop">{{cite web|url=https://www.mda.mil/system/international_cooperation.html|title=MDA International cooperation|access-date=11 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170901154454/https://www.mda.mil/system/international_cooperation.html|archive-date=1 September 2017|url-status=live}}</ref> had clarified enough to give more details about the [[Aegis Ashore]] sites in Romania (2014) and Poland (2018).<ref name=aegisAshore>{{cite web|url=https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/aegis_ashore.pdf|title=(28 July 2016) Aegis Ashore|access-date=11 October 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171011130348/https://www.mda.mil/global/documents/pdf/aegis_ashore.pdf|archive-date=11 October 2017|url-status=live}}</ref>
==Current tactical systems{{anchor|Countries with ABM capability|reason=Old section name}}==
===People's Republic of China===
{{Unreliable sources section|date=March 2022}}
==== Historical Project 640 ====
Project 640 had been the PRC's indigenous effort to develop ABM capability.<ref name="sinodefence.com">{{cite web |url=http://www.sinodefence.com/special/airdefence/project640.asp |title=Project 640: China's National Missile Defence in the '70s |publisher=SinoDefence.com |access-date=11 May 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111213232047/http://www.sinodefence.com/special/airdefence/project640.asp |archive-date=13 December 2011}}</ref> The Academy of Anti-Ballistic Missile & Anti-Satellite was established from 1969 for the purpose of developing Project 640.<ref name="sinodefence.com" /> The project was to involve at least three elements, including the necessary sensors and guidance/command system, the Fan Ji (FJ) missile interceptor, and the XianFeng missile-intercepting cannon.<ref name="sinodefence.com" /> The FJ-1 had completed two successful flight tests during 1979, while the low-altitude interceptor FJ-2 completed some successful flight tests using scaled prototypes.<ref name="sinodefence.com" /> A high altitude FJ-3 interceptor was also proposed. Despite the development of missiles, the programme was slowed down due to financial and political reasons. It was finally closed down during 1980 under a new leadership of Deng Xiaoping as it was seemingly deemed unnecessary after the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between the Soviet Union and the United States and the closure of the US [[Safeguard Program|Safeguard]] ABM system.<ref name="sinodefence.com" />
==== Operational Chinese system ====
In March 2006, China tested an interceptor system comparable to the U.S. Patriot missiles.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2006032829898 |title=donga.com[English donga&#93; |publisher=English.donga.com |date=28 March 2006 |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120620031722/http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=060000&biid=2006032829898 |archive-date=20 June 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.missilethreat.com/archives/id.537/detail.asp |title=Chinese Version of Patriot Interceptor Said Undergoing Tests |publisher=MissileThreat |date=29 March 2006 |access-date=11 May 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120720065356/http://www.missilethreat.com/archives/id.537/detail.asp |archive-date=20 July 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100112_1311.php |title=Pentagon Received No Warning of Chinese Missile Defense Test |publisher=Globalsecuritynewswire.org |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111213234815/http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100112_1311.php |archive-date=13 December 2011 |url-status=live }}</ref>
China has acquired and is license-producing the [[SA-10A Grumble#S-300PMU-1/2 (SA-20)|S-300PMU-2/S-300PMU-1]] series of terminal ABM-capable SAMs. China-produced [[HQ-9]] SAM system<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sinodefence.com/army/surfacetoairmissile/hongqi9.asp |title=HongQi 9 (HQ-9) Surface-to-Air Missile System |publisher=SinoDefence.com |date=3 October 2009 |access-date=11 May 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130904130239/http://www.sinodefence.com/army/surfacetoairmissile/hongqi9.asp |archive-date=4 September 2013 }}</ref> may possess terminal ABM capabilities. PRC Navy's operating modern air-defense destroyers known as the [[Type 052C|Type 052C Destroyer]] and [[Type 051C destroyer|Type 051C Destroyer]] are armed with naval HQ-9 missiles.
The HQ-19, similar to the [[THAAD]], was first tested in 2003, and subsequently a few more times, including in November 2015.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/11/11/did-china-just-test-a-new-satellite-killer|title=Did China Just Test a New Satellite-Killer?|first=David|last=Axe|date=11 November 2015|website=The Daily Beast|access-date=21 July 2017}}</ref> The HQ-29, a counterpart to the [[MIM-104 Patriot#MIM-104F (PAC-3)|MIM-104F PAC-3]], was first tested in 2011.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/world/china/hq-29.htm|title=HQ-29 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor|first=John|last=Pike|website=www.globalsecurity.org|access-date=21 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170806195843/http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/world/china/hq-29.htm|archive-date=6 August 2017|url-status=live}}</ref>
[[Surface-to-air missile]]s that supposedly have some terminal ABM capability (as opposed to midcourse capability):
* [[HQ-9#Variants|HQ-29]]<ref name="globalsecurity.org">{{cite web|url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/world/china/hq-19.htm|title=HQ-19 Anti-Ballistic Missile Interceptor|first=John|last=Pike|website=www.globalsecurity.org|access-date=21 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170714092135/http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/world/china/hq-19.htm|archive-date=14 July 2017|url-status=live}}</ref>
* [[HQ-19]]<ref name="globalsecurity.org"/>
* [[S-300 (missile)#Operators and other versions|HQ-18]]<ref>{{cite web |url=http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Strategic-Weapon-Systems/HQ-18-S-300V-China.html |title=HQ-18 (S-300V) (China) – Jane's Strategic Weapon Systems |publisher=Articles.janes.com |date=16 December 2011 |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120402185021/http://articles.janes.com/articles/Janes-Strategic-Weapon-Systems/HQ-18-S-300V-China.html |archive-date=2 April 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref>{{speculation inline|date=March 2022}}
* [[HQ-15]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.missilethreat.com/missiledefensesystems/id.29/system_detail.asp |title=Hongqi-15 (HQ-15) |publisher=MissileThreat |access-date=11 May 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120505035238/http://www.missilethreat.com/missiledefensesystems/id.29/system_detail.asp |archive-date=5 May 2012 }}</ref>
==== Development of midcourse ABM in China ====
The technology and experience from the successful [[2007 Chinese anti-satellite missile test|anti-satellite test]] using a ground-launched interceptor during January 2007 was immediately applied to current ABM efforts and development.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.sinodefence.com/special/airdefence/fortress-china4.asp |title=4. Anti-Stealth and Countermeasures |publisher=SinoDefence.com |access-date=11 May 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120518132501/http://sinodefence.com/special/airdefence/fortress-china4.asp |archive-date=18 May 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/story_channel.jsp?channel=defense&id=news/CHINA040809.xml&headline=China%20adds%20precision%20strike%20to%20capabilities |title=China Adds Precision Strike To Capabilities |publisher=Aviationweek.com |access-date=11 May 2012 }}{{Dead link|date=June 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>
China carried out a [[2010 Chinese anti-ballistic missile test|land-based anti-ballistic missile test]] on 11 January 2010. The test was exoatmospheric and done in midcourse<ref name=wikileaks>{{cite news | url=https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wikileaks-files/china-wikileaks/8299323/DEMARCHE-FOLLOWING-CHINAS-JANUARY-2010-INTERCEPT-FLIGHT-TEST.html | location=London | work=The Daily Telegraph | title=Demarche Following China's January 2010 Intercept Flight-Test | date=2 February 2011 | access-date=4 April 2018 | archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180203065924/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wikileaks-files/china-wikileaks/8299323/DEMARCHE-FOLLOWING-CHINAS-JANUARY-2010-INTERCEPT-FLIGHT-TEST.html | archive-date=3 February 2018 | url-status=live }}</ref> phase and with a [[kinetic kill vehicle]]. China is the second country after US that demonstrated intercepting ballistic missile with a kinetic kill vehicle, the interceptor missile was a [[DF-21#KT ABM/ASAT|SC-19]].<ref name=wikileaks /><ref name="anti-BM">{{cite web|url=http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2010-01-12/0247580308.html |script-title=zh:我国试验陆基反导 此前仅美国进行过相关试验 |publisher=SINA News |date=12 January 2010 <!-- 02:47   --> |access-date=11 January 2010| language=zh| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20100114072145/http://mil.news.sina.com.cn/2010-01-12/0247580308.html| archive-date= 14 January 2010 | url-status= live}}</ref> The sources suggest the system is not operationally deployed as of 2010.<ref name=wikileaks /><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100114_5918.php |title=NTI |publisher=Global Security Newswire |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100119032640/http://www.globalsecuritynewswire.org/gsn/nw_20100114_5918.php |archive-date=19 January 2010 |url-status=live }}</ref>
On 27 January 2013, China did another anti ballistic missile test. According to the Chinese Defence Ministry, the missile launch is defensive in character and is not aimed against any countries. Experts hailed China's technological breakthrough because it is difficult to intercept ballistic missiles that have reached the highest point and speed in the middle of their course. Only two countries, including the US, have successfully conducted such a test in the past decade.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_01_28/China-test-fires-defensive-missile/|title=China test-fires anti-ballistic missile|website=english.ruvr.ru|access-date=21 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130516201119/http://english.ruvr.ru/2013_01_28/China-test-fires-defensive-missile/|archive-date=16 May 2013|url-status=dead}}</ref>
On 4 February 2021, China successfully conducted mid-course intercept anti-ballistic missile test. Military analysts indicates that the test and dozens done before reflects China's improvement in the area.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/china-conducts-another-mid-course-anti-ballistic-missile-test |title=China conducts another mid-course anti-ballistic missile test |website=Janes |date=8 February 2021|first=Andrew |last=Tate}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39093/china-claims-it-has-conducted-a-new-midcourse-intercept-anti-ballistic-missile-test |title=China Claims It Has Conducted A New Midcourse Intercept Anti-Ballistic Missile Test |website=The Drive |date=4 February 2021 |first=Joseph |last=Trevithick |access-date=13 May 2021 |archive-date=13 May 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210513164726/https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/39093/china-claims-it-has-conducted-a-new-midcourse-intercept-anti-ballistic-missile-test |url-status=dead }}</ref>
Rumored midcourse missiles:
* [[Dong Neng-3|DN-3]]
* [[Dong Neng-2|DN-2]]
* [[Dong Ning-1|DN-1]]
* [[HQ-9#Variants|HQ-26]]<ref name="globalsecurity.org"/>
=== Europe ===
==== Aster ====
[[File:HMS Daring-1.jpg|thumb|right|Royal Navy [[Type 45 destroyer]]s (''pictured''), and French Navy and Italian Navy {{sclass2|Horizon|frigate|5}} and [[FREMM multipurpose frigate|FREMM frigates]] operate [[Aster missile|Aster 30 missiles]]]]
{{Main|Aster (missile family)}}
The [[Aster (missile family)|Aster]] is a family of missiles jointly developed by [[France]] and [[Italy]]. The Aster 30 variants are capable of ballistic missile defense. An export customer, the [[United Kingdom]] also operates the Aster 30 Block 0.
On 18 October 2010, France announced a successful tactical ABM test of the Aster 30 missile<ref name="ATBM">{{cite web|url=http://defense-update.com/wp/20101126_samp_t.html |title=SAMP/T Successful on First European Missile Defense Intercept Test |date=26 November 2010 |publisher=Defense Update |access-date=26 November 2010 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101129040354/http://defense-update.com/wp/20101126_samp_t.html |archive-date=29 November 2010}}</ref> and on 1 December 2011 a successful interception of a Black Sparrow ballistic target missile.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://ead-minerve.fr/WordPress3/?p=683 |title=Premier tir anti-balistique &#124; Blog de la DE |publisher=Ead-minerve.fr |access-date=11 May 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120426071256/http://ead-minerve.fr/WordPress3/?p=683 |archive-date=26 April 2012 }}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.marianne2.fr/blogsecretdefense/m/Une-premiere-en-France-un-missile-intercepte-par-un-antimissile-Aster_a442.html?com |title=Une première en France : un missile intercepté par un antimissile Aster |language=fr |publisher=Marianne2.fr |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://archive.today/20120905155335/http://www.marianne2.fr/blogsecretdefense/m/Une-premiere-en-France-un-missile-intercepte-par-un-antimissile-Aster_a442.html?com |archive-date=5 September 2012}}</ref> The {{sclass2|Horizon|frigate|1}}s in [[French Navy|French]] and [[Italian Navy|Italian]] service, the [[Royal Navy]]'s [[Type 45 destroyer]]s, and the French and Italian [[FREMM multipurpose frigate|FREMM-class frigates]] are all armed with [[PAAMS]] (or variants of it) integrating Aster 15 and Aster 30 missiles. France and Italy are developing a new variant, the Aster 30 Block II, which can destroy ballistic missiles up to a maximum range of {{cvt|3000|km}}. It will incorporate a [[kill vehicle]] warhead.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/eurosatory/2016/06/14/france-italy-to-cooperate-in-development-of-aster-missile/ |title=France, Italy To Cooperate in Development of Aster Missile |last=Tran |first=Pierre |work=DefenseNews |date=14 June 2016 |access-date=18 June 2021 }}</ref>
==== HYDIS² ====
Involving France, Italy, [[Germany]] and the [[Netherlands]], the HYDIS² (HYpersonic Defence Interceptor Study) was announced on June 20, 2023 and is a project led by [[MBDA]]. It was selected in March 2023 and is partially funded by the European Defense Fund (EDF). Its aim is to propose an architecture and technology maturation concept study for an endo-atmospheric interceptor to counter new, highly sophisticated emerging threats. HYDIS² is centered around the MBDA's Aquila hypersonic missile interceptor concept and will involve a consortium of 19 partners and over 30 subcontractors from 14 European countries.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://breakingdefense.com/2023/06/mbda-debuts-european-hypersonic-interceptor-concept-aquila/|title =MBDA debuts European hypersonic interceptor concept Aquila |date = 20 June 2023}}</ref> France, Germany, Italy and the Netherlands have already confirmed their support and commitment, by signing a letter of intent and agreeing to initial joint requirements.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://newsroom.mbda-systems.com/aquila-mbda-to-lead-consortium-for-european-interceptor-against-hypersonic-threats/|title =Aquila: MBDA to lead consortium for European interceptor against hypersonic threats |date = 20 June 2023}}</ref> The ultimate goal of the project is to develop a countermeasure that could be integrated into the French-led EU TWISTER (Timely Warning and Interception with Space-based TheatER surveillance) capability program. TWISTER, launched in 2019 with MBDA France acting as lead contractor as well, is intended to be an air defense system capable of early warning, tracking and intercepting high-performance air threats, including defense against ballistic missiles (BMD) and hypersonic vehicles.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.consilium.europa.eu/media/41333/pesco-projects-12-nov-2019.pdf|title = Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO)'s projects - Overview|date = 12 November 2019}}</ref><ref name="defensenews.com">{{Cite web|url=https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2022/09/05/spanish-german-companies-start-work-on-hypersonic-missile-interceptor/|title =Spanish, German companies start work on hypersonic missile interceptor|date = 5 September 2022}}</ref> The program involves France, Italy, [[Spain]], the Netherlands, [[Finland]] and Germany.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.pesco.europa.eu/project/timely-warning-and-interception-with-space-based-theater-surveillance-twister/|title = Timely Warning and Interception With Space-Based Theater Surveillance (TWISTER)|date = 12 November 2019}}</ref>
==== EU HYDEF ====
Competing against HYDIS², the EU HYDEF (European Hypersonic Defence Interceptor) also covers the concept phase to develop an endo-atmospheric interceptor and is related to TWISTER. Selected in July 2022, it is also partially funded by the EDF. It is coordinated by Spain's [[SENER|SENER Aeroespacial Sociedad Anonima]], while Germany's [[Diehl Defence]] is serving as the overall technical lead. They are heading a consortium of partners and subcontractors from various EU countries.<ref name="defensenews.com"/>
===India===
{{anchor|India}}
{{Main|Indian Ballistic Missile Defence Programme}}
[[File:Bharat BMD Phase-II (cropped).jpg|thumb|left|Second phase of Anti-ballistic Missile defense test with AD-1 missile]]
India has an active ABM development effort using indigenously developed and integrated radars, and indigenous missiles.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.defensenews.com/aero/story.php?id=2524130|title=Interview: Vijay Kumar Saraswat Chief Controller of Research and Development, India's DRDO}}{{Dead link|date=July 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref> In November 2006, India successfully conducted the [[Indian Ballistic Missile Defence Programme#Prithvi Air Defence Exercise|PADE (Prithvi Air Defence Exercise)]] in which an anti-ballistic missile, called the [[Indian Ballistic Missile Defense Program#Prithvi Air Defence (PAD) / Pradyumna Ballistic Missile Interceptor|Prithvi Air Defence (PAD)]], an ''exo-atmospheric'' (outside the atmosphere) interceptor system, intercepted a Prithvi-II ballistic missile. The PAD missile has the secondary stage of the Prithvi missile and can reach altitude of {{convert|80|km|0|abbr=on}}. During the test, the target missile was intercepted at a {{convert|50|km|0|abbr=on}} altitude.<ref>[http://mod.nic.in/samachar/dec15-06/h1.htm Prithvi Mission Milestone in Missile Defence] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071208161324/http://mod.nic.in/samachar/dec15-06/h1.htm |date=8 December 2007 }}.</ref>  On 6 December 2007, the [[Indian Ballistic Missile Defense Program#Advanced Air Defence (AAD) / Ashwin Ballistic Missile Interceptor|Advanced Air Defence (AAD)]] missile system was tested successfully.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=33815|title=India successfully conducts interceptor supersonic missile test|publisher=Pib.nic.in|access-date=11 May 2012|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151015200451/http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=33815|archive-date=15 October 2015|url-status=live}}</ref> This missile is an endo-atmospheric interceptor with an altitude of {{convert|30|km|0|abbr=on}}. First reported in 2009, the [[Defence Research and Development Organisation|Defence Research and Development Organisation (DRDO)]] is developing a new Prithvi interceptor missile code-named PDV. The PDV is designed to take out the target missile at altitudes above {{convert|150|km|abbr=on}}.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.hindu.com/2009/10/17/stories/2009101755791100.htm |title=DRDO to launch series of missiles |access-date=6 December 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121108160559/http://www.hindu.com/2009/10/17/stories/2009101755791100.htm |archive-date=8 November 2012 |work=[[The Hindu]] |date=2009-10-17 |url-status=dead }}</ref> The first PDV was successfully test fired on 27 April 2014.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=838755 |title=India Successfully Test-Fires New Interceptor Missile |publisher=News.outlookindia.com |access-date=2014-04-30 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140428163936/http://news.outlookindia.com/items.aspx?artid=838755 |archive-date=28 April 2014 }}</ref> According to scientist V K Saraswat of the DRDO, the missiles will work in tandem to ensure a hit probability of 99.8 percent.<ref>{{cite web |author=Rajat Pandit |url=http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India_on_way_to_joining_exclusive_BMD_club/rssarticleshow/2570683.cms |title=India on way to joining exclusive BMD club |work=The Times of India |date=26 November 2007 |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130513163850/http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India_on_way_to_joining_exclusive_BMD_club/rssarticleshow/2570683.cms |archive-date=13 May 2013 |url-status=live }}</ref> On 15 May 2016, India successfully launched AAD renamed [[Indian Ballistic Missile Defence Programme#Advanced Air Defence (AAD) / Ashwin Ballistic Missile Interceptor|Ashwin]] from [[Abdul Kalam Island]] off the coast of [[Odisha]].<ref>{{cite web|url=https://thediplomat.com/2016/05/india-successfully-tests-supersonic-interceptor-missile/|title=India Successfully Tests Supersonic Interceptor Missile|last=Franz-Stefan|first=Gady|access-date=21 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170814205906/https://thediplomat.com/2016/05/india-successfully-tests-supersonic-interceptor-missile/|archive-date=14 August 2017|url-status=live}}</ref>
As of 8 January 2020, the BMD programme has been completed and the [[Indian Air Force]] and the DRDO are awaiting government's final approval before the system is deployed to protect [[New Delhi]] and then Mumbai. After these two cities, it will be deployed in other major cities and regions.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web|url=https://theprint.in/defence/indias-ballistic-missile-shield-ready-iaf-drdo-to-seek-govt-nod-to-protect-delhi/345853/|title=India's ballistic missile shield ready, IAF & DRDO to seek govt nod to protect Delhi|last=Philip|first=Snehesh Alex|date=2020-01-08|website=ThePrint|language=en-US|access-date=2020-02-11}}</ref> India has structured a five-layer missile shield for [[Delhi]] as of 9 June 2019:<ref name= delhiDefense >{{cite news| url = https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/india-to-acquire-us-air-defence-system-for-multi-tier-missile-shield-over-delhi/articleshow/69717946.cms| title = Rajat Pandit (9 June 2019) India to buy US missile system to shield Delhi| website = [[The Times of India]]| date = 10 June 2019}}</ref>
PAD and PDV are designed for mid-course interception, while AAD is for terminal phase interception.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Gady |first=Franz-Stefan |date=8 January 2020 |title=Report: India's Homemade Anti-Ballistic Missile Shield Ready |url=https://thediplomat.com/2020/01/report-indias-homemade-anti-ballistic-missile-shield-ready/ |access-date=2022-11-04 |website=thediplomat.com |language=en-US}}</ref>
#Outermost BMD layer at endo- and exo-atmospheric altitudes (15–25&nbsp;km, and 80–100&nbsp;km) for 2,000&nbsp;km ranges
#[[Project Kusha (air defence system)|Project Kusha]] and [[S-400 missile system|S-400]] layer at ranges of 150, 250, 350 & 400&nbsp;km
#[[Akash-NG]], [[Barak 8|Barak-8]] layer at ranges of 70, 80, & 100&nbsp;km
#[[Akash (missile)|Akash]] layer at ranges of 25–30&nbsp;km
#Surface to air missiles and gun systems as the inner-most ring of defense. Previously planned to acquire [[NASAMS|NASAMS-II]].<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Pandit |first1=Rajat |date=June 10, 2019 |title=NASAMS 2: India to buy US missile system to shield Delhi |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/india-to-acquire-us-air-defence-system-for-multi-tier-missile-shield-over-delhi/articleshow/69717946.cms |access-date=2020-02-11 |website=The Times of India |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news|last=Lakshman|first=Sriram|url=https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/us-approves-sale-of-integrated-air-defence-weapon-system-to-india/article30787461.ece|title=U.S. State dept. nod for sale of air defence system to India|date=2020-02-11|work=The Hindu|access-date=2020-02-11|language=en-IN|issn=0971-751X}}</ref> But [[Indian Air Force]] deterred by high cost is now looking at domestic alternative (potentially land-based [[VL-SRSAM]]).<ref>{{Cite web |date=2020-02-16 |title=India concerned over 'very high price' of American missile shield for Delhi |url=https://www.livemint.com/news/india/india-concerned-over-very-high-price-of-american-missile-shield-for-delhi-11581863130642.html |access-date=2022-11-03 |website=mint |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=20 July 2022 |title=Not Keen On NASAMS-II, IAF Wants Indian Missile Defence |url=https://www.livefistdefence.com/not-keen-on-nasams-ii-iaf-wants-indian-missile-defence/ |access-date=2022-11-03 |website=Livefist Defence |language=en-US}}</ref>
The current Phase-1 of the Indian ABM system can intercept ballistic missiles of range up to 2,000&nbsp;km and the Phase-2 will increase it up to 5,000&nbsp;km.<ref>{{Cite web |last= |first= |date=3 November 2022 |title=India's AD-1 missile can intercept, destroy enemy ballistic missiles fired from 5000 km away |url=https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/indias-ad-1-missile-can-intercept-destroy-enemy-ballistic-missiles-fired-from-5000-km-away/articleshow/95279202.cms |access-date=2022-11-03 |website=The Times of India |language=en}}</ref>
=== Iran ===
[[File:3-Arman anti-ballistic missile system-سامانه‌ موشکی ضدبالستیک آرمان.jpg|thumb|right|Iranian  made [[Arman (missile system)|Arman]] anti-ballistic missile interceptor.]]
Iran used [[Arman (missile system)|Arman]] and [[S-300 missile system|S-300]] missile systems for ballistic missile defense.<ref name="Iran unveils new air defense weaponry as regional tensions ramp up, IRNA reports">{{cite news|url=https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/iran-unveils-new-air-defense-weaponry-regional-tensions-ramp-up-irna-2024-02-17/|title=Iran unveils new air defense weaponry as regional tensions ramp up, IRNA reports|work=Reuters|date=17 February 2024 |access-date=16 November 2024}}</ref><ref name="Russia Risks Reputation Of Its Weapons Systems With Iran Air Defense Delivery">{{cite web|url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/pauliddon/2024/08/07/russia-risks-reputation-of-its-weapons-systems-with-iran-air-defense-delivery/|title=Russia Risks Reputation Of Its Weapons Systems With Iran Air Defense Delivery|access-date=16 November 2024|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240924165401/https://www.forbes.com/sites/pauliddon/2024/08/07/russia-risks-reputation-of-its-weapons-systems-with-iran-air-defense-delivery/|archive-date=24 September 2024|url-status=live}}</ref>
=== Israel ===
====Arrow 2====
{{Main|Arrow (Israeli missile)}}
[[File:Arrow2 96aug.jpg|thumb|170px|right|An Arrow 2 anti-ballistic missile interceptor]]
The Arrow project was begun after the U.S. and Israel agreed to co-fund it on 6 May 1986.<ref>{{cite web |url = http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/crs_israeli-us_relations.shtml |archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20021104204721/http://www.policyalmanac.org/world/archive/crs_israeli-us_relations.shtml |url-status = dead |archive-date = 4 November 2002 |title = Israeli-United States Relations |publisher = Policy almanac |access-date = 11 May 2012 }}</ref>
The Arrow ABM system was designed and constructed in Israel with financial support by the United States by a multibillion-dollar development program called "Minhelet Homa" (Wall Administration) with the participation of companies like [[Israel Military Industries]], [[Tadiran Telecom|Tadiran]] and [[Israel Aerospace Industries]].
During 1998 the Israeli military conducted a successful test of their Arrow missile. Designed to intercept incoming missiles travelling at up to 2-mile/s (3&nbsp;km/s), the Arrow is expected to perform much better than the Patriot did in the Gulf War. On 29 July 2004 Israel and the United States carried out a joint experiment in the US, in which the Arrow was launched against a real Scud missile. The experiment was a success, as the Arrow destroyed the Scud with a direct hit. During December 2005 the system was deployed successfully in a test against a replicated [[Shahab-3]] missile. This feat was repeated on 11 February 2007.<ref>{{cite news | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6352659.stm | publisher = BBC | work = News | title = Israeli missile test 'successful' | date = 11 February 2007 | access-date = 25 April 2010 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071216001604/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6352659.stm | archive-date = 16 December 2007 | url-status = live }}</ref>
==== Arrow 3 ====
{{main|Arrow 3}}
[[File:AST-15-001.jpg|thumb|[[Arrow 3]] in testing.]]
The Arrow 3 system is capable of exo-atmosphere interception of ballistic missiles, including of [[ICBM]]s.<ref name=is/> It also acts as an anti-satellite weapon.
Lieutenant General Patrick J. O'Reilly, Director of the US [[Missile Defense Agency]], said: "The design of Arrow 3 promises to be an extremely capable system, more advanced than what we have ever attempted in the U.S. with our programs."
On 10 December 2015 Arrow 3 scored its first intercept in a complex test designed to validate how the system can detect, identify, track and then discriminate real from decoy targets delivered into space by an improved [[Sparrow (target missile)|Silver Sparrow]] target missile.<ref name=goodtest>{{cite web |url=http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/air-space/strike/2015/12/10/us-israel-arrow-3-intercepts-target-space/77087084/ |work=[[Defense News]] |title=US-Israel Arrow-3 intercepts target in space |first=Barbara |last=Opall-Rome |date=2015-12-10 |access-date=2015-12-10}}</ref> According to officials, the milestone test paves the way toward [[Low rate initial production|low-rate initial production]] of the Arrow 3.<ref name=goodtest/>
====David’s sling====
{{Main|David's Sling}}
[[File:Dec.,_2015_-_David%27s_Sling_Weapons_System_Stunner_Missile_successfully_completed_a_series_of_tests_(3).jpg|thumb|Israel's [[David's Sling]], designed to intercept tactical ballistic missiles]]
David's Sling (Hebrew: קלע דוד), also sometimes called Magic Wand (Hebrew: שרביט קסמים), is an Israel Defense Forces military system being jointly developed by the Israeli defense contractor Rafael Advanced Defense Systems and the American defense contractor [[Raytheon]], designed to intercept tactical ballistic missiles, as well as medium- to long-range rockets and slower-flying cruise missiles, such as those possessed by [[Hezbollah]], fired at ranges from 40&nbsp;km to 300&nbsp;km. It is designed with the aim of intercepting the newest generation of tactical ballistic missiles, such as [[9K720 Iskander|Iskander]].
=== Japan ===
[[File:SM3 from JDS Kongo.jpg|thumb|upright|right|Japanese [[guided missile destroyer]] {{ship|JDS|Kongō|DDG-173|6}} firing a [[Standard Missile 3]] anti-ballistic missile.]]
{{Main|RIM-161 Standard Missile 3}}
Since 1998, when North Korea launched a [[Taepodong-1]] missile over northern Japan, the Japanese have been jointly developing a new surface-to-air interceptor known as the Patriot Advanced Capability 3 (PAC-3) with the US. Tests have been successful, and there are 11 locations that are planned for the PAC-3 to be installed. The approximate locations are near major air bases, like [[Kadena Air Base]], and ammunition storage centers of the Japanese military. The exact location are not known to the public.<ref name=":5">{{Cite web |title=U.S. and Allied Ballistic Missile Defenses in the Asia-Pacific Region {{!}} Arms Control Association |url=https://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/us-allied-ballistic-missile-defenses-asia-pacific-region#Japan |access-date=2022-04-26 |website=www.armscontrol.org}}</ref>  A military spokesman<ref>{{cite news | url = http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7188698.stm | work = BBC News | title = Japan plans Tokyo missile shield | date = 15 January 2008 | access-date = 17 January 2008 | archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20080118152525/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7188698.stm | archive-date = 18 January 2008 | url-status = live }}</ref> said that tests had been done on two sites, one of them a business park in central Tokyo, and Ichigaya – a site not far from the Imperial Palace.
Along with the PAC-3, Japan has installed a US-developed ship-based anti-ballistic missile system, which was tested successfully on 18 December 2007. Japan has 4 destroyers of this type capable of carrying [[RIM-161 Standard Missile 3]] and equipped with the [[Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System]]. Japan is currently modifying another 4 destroyers so that they can take part of their defense force against ballistic missiles, bringing the total number to 8 ships.<ref name=":5" />
===Soviet Union/Russian Federation===
[[File:S-300PMU2 complex.jpg|thumb|[[S-300 (missile)|S-300PMU-2]] vehicles. From left to right: 64N6E2 detection radar, 54K6E2 command post and 5P85 TEL.]]
The Moscow ABM defense system was designed with the aim of being able to intercept the ICBM warheads aimed at Moscow and other important industrial regions, and is based on:
* [[A-35 anti-ballistic missile system|A-35 Aldan]]
** [[ABM-1 Galosh|ABM-1 Galosh / 5V61]]<ref>{{cite web |author=John Pike |url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/abm1.htm |title=GlobalSystems: ''ABM-1'' |publisher=Globalsecurity.org |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120516040109/http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/abm1.htm |archive-date=16 May 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.wonderland.org.nz/rusabgm.htm#ABM-1|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080209161638/http://www.wonderland.org.nz/rusabgm.htm#ABM-1|url-status=dead|title=Russian Anti-Ballistic Guided Missile Systems<!-- Bot generated title -->|archivedate=9 February 2008}}</ref> (decommissioned)<ref name="Pike 2018">{{cite web|author=John Pike|url=https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/galosh.htm|title=Galosh - Moscow System|date=20 April 2018|publisher=Globalsecurity.org|access-date=8 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181009013325/https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/galosh.htm|archive-date=9 October 2018|url-status=live}}</ref>
* [[A-35 anti-ballistic missile system#A-35M|A-35M]]
** [[ABM-1 Galosh|ABM-1B]]<ref>{{cite web|author=Sean O'Connor|url=http://ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-ABM-Systems.html|title=Russian/Soviet Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems|date=27 January 2014|pages=1|access-date=8 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151121053912/http://www.ausairpower.net/APA-Rus-ABM-Systems.html|archive-date=21 November 2015|url-status=live}}</ref> (decommissioned)<ref name="Pike 2018"/>
* [[A-135 anti-ballistic missile system|A-135 Amur]]
** [[ABM-3 Gazelle|ABM-3 Gazelle / 53T6]]<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.wonderland.org.nz/rusabgm.htm#ABM-3|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20080209161638/http://www.wonderland.org.nz/rusabgm.htm|url-status=dead|title=Wonderland.org: ''ABM-3''|archivedate=9 February 2008}}</ref>
** [[ABM-4 Gorgon|ABM-4 Gorgon / 51T6]]<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.wonderland.org.nz/rusabgm.htm|title=Russian Anti-Ballistic Guided Missile Systems|date=20 December 2008|access-date=21 July 2017|url-status=bot: unknown|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081220232305/http://www.wonderland.org.nz/rusabgm.htm|archive-date=20 December 2008}}</ref> (decommissioned)<ref>{{cite web|author=John Pike|url=https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/gorgon.htm|title=51T6 Gorgon|date=20 April 2018|publisher=Globalsecurity.org|access-date=8 October 2018|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20181009013309/https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/gorgon.htm|archive-date=9 October 2018|url-status=live}}</ref>
* [[A–235 anti-ballistic missile system|A–235 Nudol]] (In development)
* [[S-300 (missile)|S-300]]P (SA-10)
* [[S-300V|S-300V/V4]] (SA-12)
* [[S-300 (missile)|S-300PMU-1/2]] (SA-20)
* [[S-400]] (SA-21)
* [[S-300VM missile system|S-300VM]] (SA-23)
* [[S-500 missile|S-500 Prometey]] (serial production began in 2021)
===United States===
{{See also|Safeguard Program|Ground-Based Interceptor#Next generation interceptor (NGI)|label2=Next generation interceptor}}
[[File:Standard Missile III SM-3 RIM-161 test launch 04017005.jpg|thumb|right|200px|United States Navy [[RIM-161 Standard Missile 3]] anti-ballistic missile.]]
In several tests, the U.S. military have demonstrated the feasibility of destroying long and short range ballistic missiles.<ref name = usaSmdc2019 >{{cite web| url = https://www.army.mil/article/225470/leader_gives_space_and_missile_defense_update_at_smd_symposium| title = Jason Cutshaw (August 8, 2019) Leader gives space and missile defense update at SMD Symposium}}</ref> Combat effectiveness of newer systems against 1950s tactical ballistic missiles seems very high, as the [[MIM-104 Patriot]] (PAC-1 and PAC-2) had a 100% success rate in Operation Iraqi Freedom.<ref>{{cite web |author=John Pike |url=http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/ops/oif-patriot.htm |title=''Operation Iraqi Freedom – Patriot'' |publisher=GlobalSecurity.org |access-date=11 May 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120220031217/http://www.globalsecurity.org/space/ops/oif-patriot.htm |archive-date=20 February 2012 |url-status=live }}</ref>
The U.S. Navy [[Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System]] (Aegis BMD) uses [[RIM-161 Standard Missile 3]], which hit a target going faster than ICBM warheads.<ref name = antiSat >{{cite news|url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7254540.stm|title=BBC NEWS – World – Americas – US missile hits 'toxic satellite'|website=news.bbc.co.uk|date=21 February 2008|access-date=21 July 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090413122801/http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7254540.stm|archive-date=13 April 2009|url-status=live}}</ref> On 16 November 2020 an SM-3 Block IIA interceptor successfully destroyed an ICBM in mid-course, under [[Link-16]] Command and Control, Battle Management, and Communications ([[C2BMC]]).<ref name= ftm,44 >[https://www.defense.gov/Newsroom/Releases/Release/Article/2417334/us-successfully-conducts-sm-3-block-iia-intercept-test-against-an-intercontinen/ MDA Newsroom (17 Nov 2020) U.S. Successfully Conducts SM-3 Block IIA Intercept Test Against an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile Target] SM-3 Block IIA Intercept Test animation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUDQrLcY5oI {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210425000520/https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUDQrLcY5oI |date=25 April 2021 }}</ref>
The U.S. Army [[Terminal High Altitude Area Defense]] (THAAD) system began production in 2008.<ref>{{cite web|last1=Panda|first1=Ankit|title=What Is THAAD, What Does It Do, and Why Is China Mad About It?|url=https://thediplomat.com/2016/02/what-is-thaad-what-does-it-do-and-why-is-china-mad-about-it/|website=The Diplomat|access-date=3 April 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170404130539/https://thediplomat.com/2016/02/what-is-thaad-what-does-it-do-and-why-is-china-mad-about-it/|archive-date=4 April 2017|url-status=live}}</ref> Its stated range as a short to intermediate ballistic missile interceptor means that it is not designed to hit midcourse ICBMs, which can reach [[Intercontinental ballistic missile#Flight phases|terminal phase]] speeds of [[mach number|mach 8]] or greater. The THAAD interceptor has a reported maximum speed of mach 8, and THAAD has repeatedly proven it can intercept descending exoatmospheric missiles in a ballistic trajectory.<ref>{{Cite web |last=McCarthy |first=Niall |title=Can The U.S. Intercept A North Korean Missile? [Infographic] |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2017/09/05/can-the-u-s-intercept-a-north-korean-missile-infographic/ |access-date=2023-05-17 |website=Forbes |language=en}}</ref>
The U.S. Army [[Ground-Based Midcourse Defense]] (GMD) system was developed by the [[Missile Defense Agency]]. It combines ground-based [[AN/FPS-132 Upgraded Early Warning Radar]] installations and mobile [[AN/TPY-2]] X-band radars with 44 exoatmospheric interceptors stationed in underground silos around California and Alaska, to protect against low-count ICBM attacks from rogue states. Each [[Ground-Based Interceptor]] (GBI) rocket carries an [[Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle]] (EKV) kinetic kill interceptor, with 97% probability of intercept when four interceptors are launched at the target.
Since 2004, the [[United States Army]] plans to replace [[Raytheon]]'s Patriot missile (SAM) engagement control station (ECS), along with seven other forms of ABM defense command systems, with [[United States Army Futures Command#Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System|Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System]] (IBCS) designed to shoot down short, medium, and intermediate range ballistic missiles in their terminal phase by intercepting with a hit-to-kill approach.<ref name = ibcs2004 >{{cite web|title=Army Seeks To Field One-Size-Fits-All Battle Command System|url=http://spacenews.com/army-seeks-field-one-size-fits-all-battle-command-system/|publisher=Space News|date=29 June 2004}}</ref><ref name = history >{{cite web|last1= Kiley|first1= Gregory T.|title= Congress and the Administration Must Reassess Failing Missile Defense Programs|url= http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/05/17/failing_missile_defense_programs_111398.html|publisher= RealClearDefense|date= 17 May 2017|access-date= 22 June 2017|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20170521151129/http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2017/05/17/failing_missile_defense_programs_111398.html|archive-date= 21 May 2017|url-status= live}}</ref><ref name = 14e >{{cite web| url = https://www.army.mil/article/225475/mos_14e_linchpin_of_patriot_missile_system| title = Fort Sill Tribune staff (August 8, 2019) MOS 14E: Linchpin of Patriot missile system}}</ref><ref name = ibcsPatriotThaad >{{cite web| url = https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2018/10/10/so-patriot-and-thaad-will-talk-what-does-that-really-mean/| title = Jen Judson (11 Oct 2018) So Patriot and THAAD will talk. What does that really mean?| date = 10 October 2018}}</ref>
Northrop Grumman was selected as the prime contractor in 2010; the Army spent $2.7 billion on the program between 2009 and 2020.<ref name= pac2Pac3Intercepts >{{cite web| url = https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/smd/2020/08/20/armys-future-missile-defense-battle-command-system-caps-off-major-test-with-defeat-of-cruise-ballistic-missile-threats/| title = Jen Judson (20 Aug 2020) US Army's future missile defense command system nearly simultaneously defeats cruise, ballistic missile threats| date = 20 August 2020}}</ref> IBCS engagement stations will support identification and tracking of targets using sensor fusion from disparate data streams, and selection of appropriate kill vehicles from available launcher systems.<ref name = ibcsNorthrup >[http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/IBCS/Pages/default.aspx Integrated Air and Missile Defense Battle Command System (IBCS)]{{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171006163751/http://www.northropgrumman.com/Capabilities/IBCS/Pages/default.aspx |date=6 October 2017 }} vendor summary</ref><ref name=ibcsAward >{{cite web| url = https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/10/02/army-continues-push-for-integrated-sensors-and-shooters-with-latest-ibcs-contract/| title = Daniel Cebul (12 October 2018) Army continues push for integrated sensors and shooters with latest IBCS contract| date = 2 October 2018}}</ref><ref name = "ibcs, thaad, lrpf" >[https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2018/10/08/army-looks-to-a-future-of-integrated-fire/ Daniel Cebul  (9 October 2018) Army looks to a future of integrated fire ] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221126000941/https://www.defensenews.com/digital-show-dailies/ausa/2018/10/08/army-looks-to-a-future-of-integrated-fire/ |date=26 November 2022 }} by integrating THAAD IBCS LRPF</ref><ref>Andrew Eversden [https://breakingdefense.com/2021/12/army-awards-northrop-grumman-1-4-billion-contract-for-ibcs/ (23 Dec 2021) Army awards Northrop Grumman $1.4 billion contract for IBCS] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211224073613/https://breakingdefense.com/2021/12/army-awards-northrop-grumman-1-4-billion-contract-for-ibcs/ |date=24 December 2021 }}</ref><ref name= fallsBehind >{{cite web| url = https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/02/06/army-falls-behind-with-new-anti-missile-command-system/| title = Jen Judson (February 6, 2017) Army falls behind with new anti-missile command system| date = 6 February 2017}}</ref>
In February 2022 THAAD radar and TFCC (THAAD Fire Control & Communication) demonstrated their interoperability with Patriot PAC-3 MSE missile launchers, engaging targets using both THAAD and Patriot interceptors.<ref name= ibcsProofOfConcept >Jen Judson [https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2022/03/10/missile-defense-agency-fires-patriot-missile-from-thaad-system/ (10 Mar 2022) Missile Defense Agency fires Patriot missile from THAAD system] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20221126000939/https://www.defensenews.com/pentagon/2022/03/10/missile-defense-agency-fires-patriot-missile-from-thaad-system/ |date=26 November 2022 }}</ref>
===Republic of China===
Procurement of [[MIM-104 Patriot]] and indigenous [[Sky Bow|Tien-Kung]] anti-ballistic missile systems. With the tense situations with China, Taiwan developed the [[Sky Bow]] (or '''Tien-Kung'''), this surface-to-air missile can intercept and destroy enemy aircraft and ballistic missiles.<ref>{{cite web |last=Huang |first=Po-Chang |date=9 May 2017 |title=Who to Protect? Taiwan's SAM Systems and the Distribution of Protection |url=https://sites.tufts.edu/gis/files/2017/06/Huang_Po-Chang_DHP_207_Spring_2017.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://sites.tufts.edu/gis/files/2017/06/Huang_Po-Chang_DHP_207_Spring_2017.pdf |archive-date=2022-10-09 |url-status=live |access-date=7 April 2022 |website=TUFTS University}}</ref> These system was created in partnership with [[Raytheon Technologies]], using [[Lockheed Martin]] ADAR-HP as inspiration to create the '''Chang Bai S-band''' radar system. The missiles have a range of 200&nbsp;km and was designed to take on fast moving vehicles with low radar cross-section. The latest variant of this system is the '''Sky Bow III (TK-3)'''.
=== South Korea ===
Since North Korea started developing its nuclear weapon program, South Korea has been under imminent danger. South Korea started its BDM program by acquiring 8 batteries of the [[MIM-104 Patriot]] ('''PAC-2''') missiles from the United States. The '''PAC-2''' was developed to destroy incoming aircraft and is now unreliable in defending a ballistic missile attack from North Korea, as they have developed further their nuclear program. As of 2018, South Korea decided to improve its defense system by upgrading to the '''PAC-3''', which has a hit-to-kill capability against incoming missiles.<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal |last=Park |first=Hwee Rhak |date=2018 |title=The Ballistic Missile Defense Construction Strategies of South Korea and Japan: Self-reliance versus Cooperation with the US |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26909945 |journal=Journal of International and Area Studies |volume=25 |issue=2 |pages=87–106 |jstor=26909945 |issn=1226-8550}}</ref>  The main reason that the South Korean anti-ballistic defense system is not very developed is because they have tried to developed their own, without help from other countries, since the beginning of the 1990s.<ref name=":6" /> The South Korean [[Defense Acquisition Program Administration]] '''(DAPA)''' has confirmed that it has test launched the [[L-SAM]] system in February 2022. This particular missile has been in development since 2019 and is South Korea's next anti-ballistic missile generation. It is expected to have a range of 150&nbsp;km and be able to intercept targets between 40&nbsp;km and 100&nbsp;km of altitude, and it can also be used as an aircraft interceptor. The [[L-SAM]] system is expected to be complete and ready to use in 2024.<ref>{{Cite web |title=South Korea tests indigenous long-range surface-to-air missile |url=https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/south-korea-tests-indigenous-long-range-surface-to-air-missile |access-date=2022-04-26 |website=Janes.com |language=en}}</ref>
==History ==
===1940s and 1950s===
[[File:Wizard missile concept.jpg|thumb|right|1946 [[Project Wizard]] missile]]
[[File:NIKE Zeus.jpg|thumb|right|Launch of a [[US Army]] [[Nike Zeus]] missile, the first ABM system to enter widespread testing.]]
The idea of destroying rockets before they can hit their target dates from the first use of modern missiles in warfare, the German [[V-1 (flying bomb)|V-1]] and [[V-2 rocket|V-2]] program of [[World War II]].
British fighters destroyed some V-1 "buzz bombs" in flight, although concentrated barrages of heavy anti-aircraft artillery had greater success. Under the lend-lease program, 200 US [[90 mm Gun M1/M2/M3|90 mm AA]] guns with [[SCR-584 radar]]s and [[Western Electric]]/[[Bell Labs]] computers were sent to the UK. These demonstrated a 95% success rate against V-1s that flew into their range.<ref name=cav>Gregory Canavan, [http://missilethreat.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/20030000-Heritage-canavan.pdf "Missile Defense for the 21st Century"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150713192027/http://missilethreat.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/20030000-Heritage-canavan.pdf |date=13 July 2015 }}, Heritage Foundation, 2003, p.3</ref>
The V-2, the first true ballistic missile, has no known record of being destroyed in the air. SCR-584's could be used to plot the trajectories of the missiles and provide some warning, but were more useful in backtracking their ballistic trajectory and determining the rough launch locations. The Allies launched [[Operation Crossbow]] to find and destroy V-2s before launch, but these operations were largely ineffective. In one instance a Spitfire happened upon a V-2 rising through the trees, and fired on it with no effect.<ref name=cav/> This led to allied efforts to capture launching sites in Belgium and the Netherlands.
A wartime study by Bell Labs into the task of shooting down ballistic missiles in flight concluded it was not possible. In order to intercept a missile, one needs to be able to steer the attack onto the missile before it hits. A V-2's speed would require guns of effectively instantaneous reaction time,{{dubious|date=September 2019}} or some sort of weapon with ranges on the order of dozens of miles, neither of which appeared possible. This was, however, just before the emergence of high-speed computing systems. By the mid-1950s, things had changed considerably, and many forces worldwide were considering ABM systems.<ref name="Ramsey">{{Cite book|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=aUk5DAAAQBAJ&q=By+the+mid-1950s,+things+had+changed+considerably,+and+many+forces+worldwide+were+considering+ABM+systems.&pg=PT28|title=Tools of War: History of Weapons in Modern Times|last=Ramsey|first=Syed|date=2016-05-12|publisher=Vij Books India Pvt Ltd|isbn=9789386019837|language=en}}</ref>
The American armed forces began experimenting with anti-missile missiles soon after World War II, as the extent of German research into rocketry became clear. [[Project Wizard]] began in 1946, with the aim of creating a missile capable of intercepting the V-2.
But defences against Soviet long-range bombers took priority until 1957, when the Soviet Union demonstrated its advances in ICBM technology with the launch of [[Sputnik program|Sputnik]], the Earth's first artificial satellite. The [[US Army]] accelerated development of their [[LIM-49 Nike Zeus]] system in response. Zeus was criticized throughout its development program, especially from those within the [[US Air Force]] and nuclear weapons establishments who suggested it would be much simpler to build more nuclear warheads and guarantee [[mutually assured destruction]]. Zeus was eventually cancelled in 1963.
In 1958, the U.S. sought to explore whether airbursting nuclear weapons might be used to ward off ICBMs. It conducted several test explosions of low-yield [[nuclear weapon]]s – 1.7kt boosted fission [[W25 (nuclear warhead)|W25 warheads]] – launched from ships to very high altitudes over the southern Atlantic Ocean.<ref>Nuclear Weapon Archive.org. [http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Argus.html Argus] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060911023819/http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/Argus.html |date=11 September 2006 }}.</ref> Such an explosion releases a burst of [[X-ray]]s in the Earth's atmosphere, causing secondary showers of charged particles over an area hundreds of miles across. These can become trapped in the Earth' magnetic field, creating an artificial radiation belt. It was believed that this might be strong enough to damage warheads traveling through the layer. This proved not to be the case, but [[Operation Argus|Argus]] returned key data about a related effect, the [[nuclear electromagnetic pulse]] (NEMP).
===Canada===
Other countries were also involved in early ABM research. A more advanced project was at [[DRE Valcartier|CARDE]] in Canada, which researched the main problems of ABM systems. A key problem with any radar system is that the signal is in the form of a cone, which spreads with distance from the transmitter. For long-distance interceptions like ABM systems, the inherent inaccuracy of the radar makes an interception difficult. CARDE considered using a [[terminal guidance]] system to address the accuracy concerns, and developed several advanced [[infrared]] detectors for this role. They also studied a number of missile airframe designs, a new and much more powerful solid rocket fuel, and numerous systems for testing it all. After a series of drastic budget reductions during the late 1950s the research ended. One offshoot of the project was [[Gerald Bull]]'s system for inexpensive high-speed testing, consisting of missile airframes shot from a [[sabot (firearms)|sabot]] round, which would later be the basis of [[Project HARP]]. Another was the [[CRV7]] and [[Black Brant (rocket)|Black Brant]] rockets, which used the new solid rocket fuel.
===Soviet Union===
[[File:V-1000 ABM prototype.svg|thumb|V-1000]]
The Soviet military had requested funding for ABM research as early as 1953, but were only given the go-ahead to begin deployment of such a system on 17 August 1956. Their test system, known simply as System A, was based on the V-1000 missile, which was similar to the early US efforts. The first successful test interception was carried out on 24 November 1960, and the first with a live warhead on 4 March 1961. In this test, a dummy warhead was released by a [[R-12 (missile)|R-12]] [[ballistic missile]] launched from the [[Kapustin Yar]],<ref name=gobarev>{{cite journal |last1=Gobarev |first1=Victor |year=2001 |title=The early development of Russia's ballistic missile defense system |journal=The Journal of Slavic Military Studies |volume=14 |issue=2 |pages=29–48|doi=10.1080/13518040108430478|s2cid=144681318 }} Viewed 26 May 2012.</ref> and intercepted by a V-1000 launched from [[Sary-Shagan]]. The dummy warhead was destroyed by the impact of 16,000 [[tungsten-carbide]] spherical impactors 140 seconds after launch, at an altitude of {{convert|25|km|ft|abbr=on}}.<ref name="Karpenko1999">{{Cite journal| first = A| last = Karpenko| year = 1999| title = ABM AND SPACE DEFENSE| journal = Nevsky Bastion| volume = 4| pages = 2–47| url = https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/soviet/990600-bmd-rus.htm| access-date = 18 October 2015| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20160303165344/http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/soviet/990600-bmd-rus.htm| archive-date = 3 March 2016| url-status = live}}</ref>
The V-1000 missile system was nonetheless considered not reliable enough and abandoned in favour of nuclear-armed ABMs. Retired V-1000 was used to develop 1Ya2TA [[sounding rocket]], capable of launching 520 kg scientific payload to an altitude of 400 km.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Krebs |first=Gunter Dirk |title=1Ya2TA |url=https://space.skyrocket.de/doc_lau/1ya2ta.htm |access-date=2024-11-12 |website=Gunter's Space Page}}</ref> A much larger missile, the [[ABM-1 Galosh|Fakel 5V61]] (known in the west as Galosh), was developed to carry the larger warhead and carry it much further from the launch site. Further development continued, and the [[A-35 anti-ballistic missile system]], designed to protect Moscow, became operational in 1971. A-35 was designed for exoatmospheric interceptions, and would have been highly susceptible to a well-arranged attack using multiple warheads and radar black-out techniques.
A-35 was upgraded during the 1980s to a two-layer system, the [[A-135 anti-ballistic missile system|A-135]]. The Gorgon (SH-11/ABM-4) long-range missile was designed to handle intercepts outside the atmosphere, and the [[53T6|Gazelle (SH-08/ABM-3)]] short-range missile endoatmospheric intercepts that eluded Gorgon. The A-135 system is considered to be technologically equivalent to the United States Safeguard system of 1975.<ref>GlobalSecurity.org. [http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/abm3.htm -135 anti-ballistic missile system] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20071015034259/http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/russia/abm3.htm |date=15 October 2007 }}.</ref>
===American Nike-X and Sentinel===
[[Nike Zeus]] failed to be a credible defence in an era of rapidly increasing ICBM counts due to its ability to attack only one target at a time. Additionally, significant concerns about its ability to successfully intercept warheads in the presence of high-altitude nuclear explosions, including its own, lead to the conclusion that the system would simply be too costly for the very low amount of protection it could provide.
By the time it was cancelled in 1963, potential upgrades had been explored for some time. Among these were radars capable of scanning much greater volumes of space and able to track many warheads and launch several missiles at once. These, however, did not address the problems identified with radar blackouts caused by high-altitude explosions. To address this need, a new missile with extreme performance was designed to attack incoming warheads at much lower altitudes, as low as 20&nbsp;km. The new project encompassing all of these upgrades was launched as [[Nike-X]].
The main missile was [[LIM-49 Spartan]]—a Nike Zeus upgraded for longer range and a much larger 5 megaton warhead intended to destroy enemy's warheads with a burst of x-rays outside the atmosphere. A second shorter-range missile called [[Sprint (missile)|Sprint]] with very high acceleration was added to handle warheads that evaded longer-ranged Spartan. Sprint was a very fast missile (some sources{{who|date=March 2015}} claimed it accelerated to 8,000&nbsp;mph (13&nbsp;000&nbsp;km/h) within 4 seconds of flight—an average acceleration of ''90 [[g-force|g]]'') and had a smaller W66 [[Neutron bomb|enhanced radiation]] warhead in the 1–3 kiloton range for in-atmosphere interceptions.
The experimental success of Nike X persuaded the [[Lyndon B. Johnson]] administration to propose a thin ABM defense, that could provide almost complete coverage of the United States. In a September 1967 speech, Defense Secretary [[Robert McNamara]] referred to it as "[[Sentinel program|Sentinel]]". McNamara, a private ABM opponent because of cost and feasibility (see [[cost-exchange ratio]]), claimed that Sentinel would be directed not against the Soviet Union's missiles (since the [[Soviet Union|USSR]] had more than enough missiles to overwhelm any American defense), but rather against the potential nuclear threat of the People's Republic of China.
In the meantime, a public debate over the merit of ABMs began. Difficulties that had already made an ABM system questionable for defending against an all-out attack. One problem was the [[Fractional Orbital Bombardment System]] (FOBS) that would give little warning to the defense. Another problem was high altitude EMP (whether from offensive or defensive nuclear warheads) which could degrade defensive radar systems.
When this proved infeasible for economic reasons, a much smaller deployment using the same systems was proposed, namely Safeguard (described later).
===Defense against MIRVs===
[[File:Peacekeeper-missile-testing.jpg|thumb|right|Testing of the [[LGM-118A Peacekeeper]] re-entry vehicles, all eight shot from only one missile. Each line is the path of a warhead which, were it live, would detonate with the explosive power of twenty-five [[Little Boy|Hiroshima-style]] weapons.]]
ABM systems were developed initially to counter single warheads launched from large [[intercontinental ballistic missile]]s (ICBMs). The economics seemed simple enough; since rocket costs increase rapidly with size, the price of the ICBM launching a large warhead should always be greater than the much smaller interceptor missile needed to destroy it. In an arms race the defense would always win.<ref name="Ramsey" />{{rp|p=18}}
In addition to the blast effect, the detonation of nuclear devices against attacking intercontinental ballistic missiles produces a neutron kill effect from the strong radiation emitted, and this neutralizes the warhead, or warheads, of the attacking missile.<ref>{{cite book |title=A Dictionary of Aviation |first=David W. |last=Wragg |isbn=9780850451634 |edition=first |publisher=Osprey |date=1973 |page=200 }}</ref> Most A.B.M. devices depend on neutron kill for their effectiveness.
In practice, the price of the interceptor missile was considerable, due to its sophistication. The system had to be guided all the way to an interception, which demanded guidance and control systems that worked within and outside the atmosphere. Due to their relatively short ranges, an ABM missile would be needed to counter an ICBM wherever it might be aimed. That implies that dozens of interceptors are needed for every ICBM since warhead's targets couldn't be known in advance.  This led to intense debates about the "[[cost-exchange ratio]]" between interceptors and warheads.
Conditions changed dramatically in 1970 with the introduction of [[multiple independently targetable reentry vehicle]] (MIRV) warheads. Suddenly, each launcher was throwing not one warhead, but several. These would spread out in space, ensuring that a single interceptor would be needed for each warhead. This simply added to the need to have several interceptors for each warhead in order to provide geographical coverage. Now it was clear that an ABM system would always be many times more expensive than the ICBMs they defended against.<ref name="Ramsey"/>
===Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972===
{{main|Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty}}
Technical, economic and political problems described resulted in the [[Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty|ABM treaty]] of 1972, which restricted the deployment of strategic (not tactical) anti-ballistic missiles.
By the ABM treaty and a 1974 revision, each country was allowed to deploy a mere 100 ABMs to protect a single, small area. The Soviets retained their Moscow defences. The U.S. designated their ICBM sites near Grand Forks Air Force Base, North Dakota, where Safeguard was already under advanced development. The radar systems and anti-ballistic missiles were approximately 90 miles north/northwest of Grand Forks AFB, near Concrete, North Dakota. The missiles were deactivated in 1975. The main radar site (PARCS) is still used as an early warning ICBM radar, facing relative north. It is located at Cavalier Air Force Station, North Dakota.
===Brief use of Safeguard in 1975/1976===
The U.S. [[Safeguard Program|Safeguard]] system, which utilized the nuclear-tipped [[LIM-49A Spartan]] and [[Sprint (missile)|Sprint]] missiles, in the short operational period of 1975/1976, was the second counter-ICBMs system in the world. Safeguard protected only the main fields of US ICBMs from attack, theoretically ensuring that an attack could be responded to with a US launch, enforcing the [[mutually assured destruction]] principle.
===SDI experiments in the 1980s===
{{main|Strategic Defense Initiative}}
The [[Ronald Reagan|Reagan]]-era [[Strategic Defense Initiative]] (often referred to as "Star Wars"), along with research into various energy-beam weaponry, brought new interest in the area of ABM technologies.
SDI was an extremely ambitious program to provide a total shield against a massive Soviet ICBM attack. The initial concept envisioned large sophisticated orbiting laser battle stations, space-based relay mirrors, and nuclear-pumped X-ray laser satellites. Later research indicated that some planned technologies such as X-ray [[laser]]s were not feasible with then-current technology. As research continued, SDI evolved through various concepts as designers struggled with the difficulty of such a large complex defense system. SDI remained a research program and was never deployed. Several post-SDI technologies are used by the present [[Missile Defense Agency]] (MDA).
Lasers originally developed for the SDI plan are in use for astronomical observations. Used to ionize gas in the upper atmosphere, they provide telescope operators with a target to calibrate their instruments.<ref>{{cite journal|title=Military Magic Boosts Astronomy : Declassified technology enhances celestial knowledge|journal=Astronomy|date=January 2001|volume=29|issue=1|page=48|url=https://eds.b.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=6&sid=d2b37e4a-4a62-4a05-8cc7-7521f023995e%40sessionmgr101&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmU%3d#AN=edsgcl.75029301&db=edsgbc|access-date=26 January 2018}}{{Dead link|date=August 2018 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes }}</ref>
===Tactical ABMs deployed in 1990s===
The Israeli [[Arrow (Israeli missile)|Arrow missile]] system was tested initially during 1990, before the [[Gulf War|first Gulf War]]. The Arrow was supported by the United States throughout the 1990s.
The [[Patriot missile|Patriot]] was the first deployed tactical ABM system, although it was not designed from the outset for that task and consequently had limitations. It was used during the 1991 Gulf War to attempt to intercept Iraqi [[Scud]] missiles. Post-war analyses show that the Patriot was much less effective than initially thought because of its radar and control system's inability to discriminate warheads from other objects when the Scud missiles broke up during reentry.
<!--[https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/nmd/index.html FAS] also has a time line for ABM/NMB/TBMD starting in [https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/milestone.htm Missile Defense Milestones]-->
Testing ABM technology continued during the 1990s with mixed success. After the Gulf War, improvements were made to several U.S. air defense systems. A new Patriot, [[PAC-3]], was developed and tested—a complete redesign of the PAC-2 deployed during the war, including a totally new missile. The improved guidance, radar and missile performance improves the probability of kill over the earlier PAC-2. During Operation Iraqi Freedom, Patriot batteries engaged 100% of enemy [[Tactical ballistic missile|TBMs]] within their engagement territory. Of these engagements, 8 of them were verified as kills by multiple independent sensors; the remaining was listed as a probable kill due to lack of independent verification. Patriot was involved in three [[friendly fire]] incidents: two incidents of Patriot shootings at coalition aircraft and one of U.S. aircraft shooting at a Patriot battery.<ref>{{cite web |publisher=Defense Science Board Task Force |url=http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2005-01-Patriot_Report_Summary.pdf |title=Patriot system performance – report summary |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060226111836/http://www.acq.osd.mil/dsb/reports/2005-01-Patriot_Report_Summary.pdf |archive-date=26 February 2006 |date=January 2005}}</ref>
A new version of the Hawk missile was tested during the early to mid-1990s and by the end of 1998 the majority of US Marine Corps Hawk systems were modified to support basic theater anti-ballistic missile capabilities.<ref>{{cite web |publisher=FAS |url=https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/hawk.htm |title=Hawk |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20151015200451/http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/hawk.htm |archive-date=15 October 2015}}</ref> The [[MIM-23 Hawk]] missile is not operational in U.S. service since 2002, but is used by many other countries.
[[File:Navy Theater Ballistic Missile Defense.JPG|thumb|right|Developed in the late 1990s, the Lightweight Exo-Atmospheric Projectile attaches to a modified [[RIM-156 Standard|SM-2 Block IV missile]] used by the [[United States Navy|U.S. Navy]]]]
Soon after the Gulf War, the [[Aegis Combat System]] was expanded to include ABM capabilities. The [[RIM-156 Standard|Standard missile]] system was also enhanced and tested for ballistic missile interception. During the late 1990s, SM-2 block IVA missiles were tested in a theater ballistic missile defense function.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/sm2.htm |title=Navy Area Defense (NAD) |publisher=FAS |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070812145613/https://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/sm2.htm|archive-date=12 August 2007}}</ref> [[RIM-161 Standard missile 3|Standard Missile 3 (SM-3)]] systems have also been tested for an ABM role. In 2008, an SM-3 missile launched from the {{sclass|Ticonderoga|cruiser|2}} {{USS|Lake Erie|CG-70|6}}, successfully intercepted [[USA-193|a non-functioning satellite]].<ref>{{cite press release|title=DoD Succeeds in Intercepting Non-Functioning Satellite|url=http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=11704|date=20 February 2008|number=No. 0139-08|publisher=U.S. Department of Defense|access-date=20 February 2008| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080226105236/http://www.defenselink.mil/releases/release.aspx?releaseid=11704| archive-date= 26 February 2008 | url-status= live}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release|title= Navy Succeeds in Intercepting Non-Functioning Satellite|url=http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=35114|publisher=U.S. Navy|date=20 February 2008|number=NNS080220-19|access-date=20 February 2008| archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20080225234718/http://www.navy.mil/search/display.asp?story_id=35114| archive-date= 25 February 2008 | url-status= live}}</ref>
===Brilliant Pebbles concept===
Approved for acquisition by the Pentagon during 1991 but never realized, [[Brilliant Pebbles]] was a proposed space-based anti-ballistic system that was meant to avoid some of the problems of the earlier SDI concepts. Rather than use sophisticated large laser battle stations and nuclear-pumped X-ray laser satellites, Brilliant Pebbles consisted of a thousand very small, intelligent orbiting satellites with kinetic warheads. The system relied on improvements of computer technology, avoided problems with overly centralized command and control and risky, expensive development of large, complicated space defense satellites.
It promised to be much less expensive to develop and have less technical development risk.
The name Brilliant Pebbles comes from the small size of the satellite interceptors and great computational power enabling more autonomous targeting. Rather than rely exclusively on ground-based control, the many small interceptors would cooperatively communicate among themselves and target a large swarm of ICBM warheads in space or in the late boost phase. Development was discontinued later in favor of a limited ground-based defense.
===Transformation of SDI into MDA, development of NMD/GMD===
While the Reagan era Strategic Defense Initiative was intended to shield against a massive Soviet attack, during the early 1990s, President [[George H. W. Bush]] called for a more limited version using rocket-launched interceptors based on the ground at a single site. Such system was developed since 1992, was expected to become operational in 2010<ref>{{cite web|title=Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)|url=http://www.mda.mil/system/gmd.html|publisher=MDA|access-date=8 February 2011|quote="A total of 30 interceptors are planned for deployment by the end of 2010. "|url-status=dead|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20101206200507/http://www.mda.mil/system/gmd.html|archive-date=6 December 2010}}</ref> and capable of intercepting small number of incoming ICBMs. First called the National Missile Defense (NMD), since 2002 it was renamed [[Ground-Based Midcourse Defense]] (GMD). It was planned to protect all 50 states from a rogue missile attack. The Alaska site provides more protection against North Korean missiles or accidental launches from Russia or China, but is likely less effective against missiles launched from the Middle East. The Alaska interceptors may be augmented later by the naval Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System or by ground-based missiles in other locations.
During 1998, Defense Secretary [[William Cohen]] proposed spending an additional $6.6 billion on intercontinental ballistic missile defense programs to build a system to protect against attacks from North Korea or accidental launches from Russia or China.<ref>PBS. [[The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer]]. [https://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june99/nmd_1-28a.html A Viable Defense?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110127132413/http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/military/jan-june99/nmd_1-28a.html |date=27 January 2011 }}. 28 January 1999.</ref>
In terms of organization, during 1993 SDI was reorganized as the Ballistic Missile Defense Organization. In 2002, it was renamed to [[Missile Defense Agency]] (MDA).
===21st century===
On 13 June 2002, the United States withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and recommenced developing missile defense systems that would have formerly been prohibited by the bilateral treaty. The action was stated as needed to defend against the possibility of a missile attack conducted by a [[rogue state]]. The next day, the Russian Federation dropped the [[START II]] agreement, intended to completely ban [[MIRV]]s.
[[2010 Lisbon summit|The Lisbon Summit of 2010]] saw the adoption of a [[NATO]] program that was formed in response to the threat of a rapid increase of [[ballistic missile]]s from potentially unfriendly regimes, though no specific region, state, or country was formally mentioned. This adoption came from the recognition of territorial missile defense as a core alliance objective. At this time, Iran was seen as the likely aggressor that eventually led to the adoption of this ABM system, as Iran has the largest missile arsenal of the Middle East, as well as a space program. From this summit, [[NATO]]'s ABM system was potentially seen as a threat by Russia, who felt that their ability to retaliate any perceived nuclear threats would be degraded. To combat this, Russia proposed that any ABM system enacted by NATO must be universal to operate, cover the entirety of the European continent, and not upset any nuclear parity. The United States actively sought NATO involvement in the creation of an ABM system, and saw an Iranian threat as a sufficient reason to warrant its creation. The United States also had plans to create missile defense facilities, but [[NATO]] officials feared that it would have provided protection to Europe, it would have detracted from the responsibility of [[NATO]] for collective defense. The officials also argued the potential prospect of U.S-commanded operation system that would work in conjunction with the [[North Atlantic Treaty|Article 5]] defense of [[NATO]].<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Hildreth |first1=Steven A. |last2=Ek |first2=Carl |date=2010-12-28 |title=Missile Defense and NATO's Lisbon Summit |url=https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc491310/ |access-date=2022-05-11 |website=UNT Digital Library |language=English}}</ref>
On 15 December 2016, the US Army [[SMDC]] had a successful test of a U.S. Army Zombie Pathfinder rocket, to be used as a target for exercising various anti-ballistic missile scenarios. The rocket was launched as part of NASA's [[sounding rocket]] program, at White Sands Missile Range.<ref>[https://www.army.mil/article/179788/us_army_announces_successful_test_of_us_army_zombie_pathfinder_rocket U.S. Army announces successful test of U.S. Army Zombie Pathfinder rocket] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170109113728/https://www.army.mil/article/179788/us_army_announces_successful_test_of_us_army_zombie_pathfinder_rocket |date=9 January 2017 }} accessdate=2017-01-08</ref>
In November 2020, the US successfully destroyed a dummy ICBM. The ICBM was launched from [[Kwajalein Atoll]]<ref name=in20years>[http://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/weather/climatechange/ADA422382.pdf  Richard F. Pittenger and Robert B. Gagosian (Dec 2003) Global Warming Could Have a Chilling Effect on the Military] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210506004712/https://documents.theblackvault.com/documents/weather/climatechange/ADA422382.pdf |date=6 May 2021 }} "Military planners should begin to consider potential abrupt
climate change scenarios and their impacts on national defense."
*[https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2582051/defense-secretary-calls-climate-change-an-existential-threat/ David Vergun (22 April 2021) Defense Secretary Calls Climate Change an Existential Threat] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210427140653/https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2582051/defense-secretary-calls-climate-change-an-existential-threat/ |date=27 April 2021 }}
*[https://www.huffpost.com/entry/defense-department-climate-change-national-security-threat_n_5c420386e4b027c3bbc1713f Chris D’Angelo and Alexander C. Kaufman (01/18/2019)  Pentagon Confirms Climate Change Is A National Security Threat, Contradicting Trump] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210427135218/https://www.huffpost.com/entry/defense-department-climate-change-national-security-threat_n_5c420386e4b027c3bbc1713f |date=27 April 2021 }} 79 Military installations; " 'Air Force's $1 billion radar installation on a Marshall Islands atoll 'is projected to be underwater within two decades'."
*[https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/key-missile-defense-installation-will-be-uninhabitable-in-less-than-20-years/  Scott Waldman, E&E News (1 March 2018) Key Missile Defense Installation Will be Uninhabitable in Less Than 20 Years] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210427134105/https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/key-missile-defense-installation-will-be-uninhabitable-in-less-than-20-years/ |date=27 April 2021 }}:Rising seas will ruin Kwajalein Atoll site where 1,300 work and live</ref><ref name=reaganTestSite >{{cite web| url = https://www.army.mil/article/243648/armys_reagan_test_site_supports_missile_test| title = Jason Cutshaw (24 February 2021) Army's Reagan Test Site supports missile test}}</ref> in the general direction of Hawaii, triggering a satellite warning to a Colorado Air Force base, which then contacted the {{USS|John Finn}}. The ship launched a [[SM-3|SM-3 Block IIA]] missile to destroy the US dummy, still outside the atmosphere.<ref>{{cite web |last1=Bowman |first1=Bradley |title=Successful SM-3 weapons test offers missile defense opportunity |url=https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/11/21/successful-sm-3-weapons-test-offers-missile-defense-opportunity/ |website=defensenews.com |date=23 November 2020 |access-date=25 November 2020}}</ref>
==See also==
* [[2010 Chinese anti-ballistic missile test]]
* [[Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System]]
* [[Atmospheric entry]]
* [[Command systems in the United States Army]]
* [[Comparison of anti-ballistic missile systems]]
* [[Indian Ballistic Missile Defence Programme]]
* [[Kinetic kill vehicle]]
* [[Missile defense]]
* [[Torpedo defence|Anti-torpedo torpedoes]]
* [[Multiple Kill Vehicle]]
* [[National Missile Defense]]
* [[Nuclear disarmament]]
* [[Nuclear proliferation]]
* [[Nuclear warfare]]
* [[Safeguard Program|Safeguard/Sentinel ABM system]]
* [[LIM-49A Spartan|Spartan (missile)]]
* [[Sprint (missile)]]
* [[Terminal High Altitude Area Defense]]
== Notes ==
{{Notelist}}
== Citations ==
{{Reflist|30em}}
== General sources ==
* [[Clark A. Murdock|Murdock, Clark A.]] (1974), ''Defense Policy Formation: A Comparative Analysis of the McNamara Era''. SUNY Press.
==Further reading==
* [[Laura Grego]] and David Wright, "Broken Shield:  Missiles designed to destroy incoming nuclear warheads fail frequently in tests and could increase global risk of mass destruction", ''[[Scientific American]]'', vol. 320, no. no. 6 (June 2019), pp.&nbsp;62–67.  "Current U.S. [[missile defense]] plans are being driven largely by [[technology]], [[politics]] and [[fear]].  Missile defenses will not allow us to escape our vulnerability to [[nuclear weapon]]s.  Instead large-scale developments will create barriers to taking real steps toward [[Nuclear disarmament|reducing nuclear risk]]s—by blocking further cuts in nuclear arsenals and potentially spurring new deployments."  (p.&nbsp;67.)
==External links==
{{Commons category|Anti-ballistic missiles}}
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20140201183352/http://www.thediplomat.ro/articol.php?id=554 Article on Missile Threat Shift to the Black Sea region]
*[http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2723153636466253240 Video of the Endo-Atmospheric Interceptor missile system test by India] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110716140208/http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2723153636466253240 |date=16 July 2011 }}
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20061219195340/http://www.ibnlive.com/videos/27568/india-unveils-missile-interceptors.html Video of the Exo-Atmospheric interceptor missile system test by India]
*[http://www.cdi.org Center for Defense Information]
*[https://fas.org/ssp/bmd/index.html Federation of American Scientists]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20120720083017/http://missilethreat.com/systems/ MissileThreat.com]
*[http://www.srmsc.org/ Stanley R. Mickelson Safeguard complex]
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20051229203013/http://www.redstone.army.mil/history/vigilant/intro.html History of U.S. Air Defense Systems]
{{Missile types}}
{{Authority control}}
{{DEFAULTSORT:Anti-Ballistic Missile}}
[[Category:Anti-ballistic missiles| ]]
[[Category:Missile defense]]
[[Category:Missile types]]
[[Category:Russian inventions]]
[[Category:Surface-to-air missiles]]