Modern Diplomacy
There Are No Impenetrable Umbrellas: Missile Defence and International Security
Valdai Club Conference Hall, Tsvetnoy Boulevard 16/1, Moscow, Russia
List of speakers

On January 17, the Valdai Club hosted a presentation of the new Valdai Club Report, titled “The Shoot Down/Miss the Target Dilemma: The Evolution of Missile Defence and Its Implications for Arms Control.” The authors of the report took part in the presentation. The moderator Andrey Sushentsov, programme director of the Valdai Discussion Club, noted that missile defence systems are often perceived as a destabilising factor in terms of international security, as many believe that they provoke an arms race.

Alexander Chekov, Senior Research Fellow at the Center for Advanced American Studies, MGIMO, Russian Foreign Ministry, listed the trends in the development of missile defence in the report. He pointed to the merging of various systems and means within the framework of integrated aerospace defence structures, the development of new technologies in the field of missile defence, and the development of forward-based systems. “Apparently, in the near future, operational-tactical and strategic systems will function within the framework of the general contours of combat control, and rely on a single sensor system,” the expert believes. In his opinion, this will stimulate an arms race and hinder the coordination of international restrictions in the field of missile defence. He suggested that radical breakthroughs in missile defence effectiveness, which could lead to the creation of an “impenetrable shield”, should not be expected, but in general, the influence of missile defence on the strategic balance will increase.

Konstantin Bogdanov, Senior Researcher, Center for International Security, IMEMO RAS, noted that if we talk about missile defence as a factor in ensuring strategic stability, it turns out that over the past half a century, this topic has noticeably expanded beyond its original conceptual basis. According to him, missile defence began from a very narrow segment – namely, from the interception of strategic delivery vehicles. Now the scope and capabilities of missile defence have expanded significantly, which means that missile defence can no longer be seen solely as a factor of destabilisation. This fundamentally changes the impact of missile defence on strategic stability. Speaking about the prospects for arms control, Bogdanov stressed that in this area, the logic of a direct ban could give way to a point-to-point accounting of certain specific potentials in certain specific regions.

Oleg Krivolapov, Senior Researcher, Department of Military-Political Studies, Institute for the US and Canadian Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, gave a brief overview of the sections of the report. He paid special attention to the development of sensor technologies and combat control systems. He emphasised that there is a growing number of missile defence systems that can be integrated into the American command and control architecture, and more and more often we are talking about integration within regions. The analyst pointed to the security threats associated with these trends, where the integration of sensors and combat control systems with offensive weapons plays an important role.

Dmitry Stefanovich, a researcher at the Center for International Security, IMEMO RAS, outlined the reaction of countries to the development of missile defence against potential adversaries. He noted that there are no “impenetrable umbrellas” of anti-missile and air defence. Respectively, seeing the development of missile defence among rivals, countries are looking for means of counteraction, and they assume worst-case scenarios and try to “hedge risks” to the maximum. This accelerates the arms race. “On the one hand, we are seeing quite interesting technical solutions and additional incentives for scientific and technological progress, but, on the other hand, this, of course, does not make our world safer,” Stefanovich concluded.