{"id":36002,"date":"2020-02-06T15:34:42","date_gmt":"2020-02-06T15:34:42","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/uncategorized\/2020\/02\/06\/americas-missile-defense-cannot-afford-a-decade-long-gap\/"},"modified":"2026-08-07T22:55:21","modified_gmt":"2026-08-07T22:55:21","slug":"americas-missile-defense-cannot-afford-a-decade-long-gap","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/commentary\/2020\/02\/06\/americas-missile-defense-cannot-afford-a-decade-long-gap\/","title":{"rendered":"America\u2019s missile defense cannot afford a decade-long gap"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

America is facing a decision point with regard to our national ballistic missile defense capability. Do we chose protection today, protection tomorrow, or try to cover both? We cannot afford to forget the future, nor can we go naked into the briar patch today. We have to adequately protect both. In this threat environment, we cannot have a gap in our defenses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Pentagon recently made a prudent decision to invest in our future protection. This decision can be seen as placing our proverbial missile defense eggs in one basket we called Next Generation Interceptor, or NGI. That project is on target to be combat-ready at the earliest by the year 2030. Alone, however, it is not sufficient.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The threats Americans face on the global stage are real and constantly changing, but one thing remains constant: The most likely threat to our assets abroad and in the homeland will depend on the use of short- and longer-range ballistic missiles.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Traditional foes like Russia and China are investing heavily in hypersonic weaponry. North Korea is just as volatile as it has ever been, and an evermore aggressive Iran keeps us all aware of just how precarious the situation is in the Middle East. The hatred motivating Iran and its numerous proxies led to them recently launching over a dozen missiles<\/a> at bases in the Middle East.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

No Americans were killed<\/a> in the launch; however, many service members have been diagnosed<\/a> with brain injuries. Analysis of the attacks show that Iran may not have been as \u201coff\u201d with its targeting as the low casualty count would indicate. Perhaps by providing advanced warning, Iran\u2019s intention was not to kill Americans after all. We may have just been fortunate that they did not want to further provoke our ire. Regardless, the bottom line was that we lacked the missile defense to combat the Iranians and protect our assets.<\/p>\n\n\n\t