Conventional ICBMs To Deter Terrorists

In today's edition of the Washington Times' Inside the Ring, Bill Gertz and Rowan Scarborough report the United States is considering the use intercontinental ballistic missiles with conventional warheads for deterrence against terrorists and rogue states.

Marine Corps Gen. James E. Cartwright told a Pentagon-sponsored missile defense conference on Monday that "it's very difficult for a nuclear weapon to be a credible deterrent against an extremist."

In addition to the "tyranny of distance" that makes it hard for military forces to get to an area of the world very quickly, there is also the problem of the inadequate speed of current conventional systems. Today's bombers need an hour to travel 500 miles, and ships take longer.

An ICBM, however, can cover 6,000 miles in minutes and the technology for adding precision guided, non-nuclear warheads is available now, Gen. Cartwright said. And the warhead does not need to be high-explosive. Just the kinetic impact of a long-range inert warhead can cause tremendous damage because of the high speed. The warheads are accurate enough to land within 12 feet of the target.

Wouldn't the use of "conventional ICBMs" cause all kinds of problems with the hair triggers associated with responding to a nuclear missel attack? Wouldn't we have to inform adversaries armed with nuclear missiles, such as Russia and China we were launching a "conventional ICBM" attack against terrorists, and then hope those adversaries trust us.?

Comments

[Kent]

Wouldn't we have to inform adversaries armed with nuclear missiles, such as Russia and China we were launching a "conventional ICBM" attack against terrorists, and then hope those adversaries trust us.?

Advising the other nuclear powers might be the courteous thing, but trust is not required. Tracking will show the likely target. In addition, one imagines such a strike will be just a handful of ICBMS, so it won't look like an unprovoked surprise counterforce strike.

Whether using conventionally-armed ICBMs to hit terrorists is cost-effective is a whole 'nother question.