Russia-Georgia War Highlights Need For Directed-Energy Defences

By James Jay Carafano Ph.D
Heritage Foundation

For the second time in recent years, the United States has witnessed another wake-up call for the importance of fielding directed-energy weapons capable of shooting-down mortar and artillery fire, as well as intercepting short-range rockets and missiles.The Pentagon, the Department of Homeland Security, and the Congress need to place more emphasis on fielding working prototypes of these systems as quickly as possible.

People as Targets

Terrorism continues to be the scourge of the 21st century, but the age of conventional wars is far from over. In recent years we have had plenty examples where both means of warfare have employed conventional weapons to target civilians. Specifically, indirect fire weapons from mortars to short-range missiles have been directly targeted against innocents or employed against military targets in urban areas, putting civilian populations at risk. Terrorists in North Africa attempted to shoot down a commercial airliner with a short-range surface-to-air missile. In Iraq, insurgent groups used mortars to fire on administrative buildings, as well as military facilities in Baghdad and other urban areas.

Even more troubling, however, is the use of these conventional weapons in combat zones aimed at the heart of civilian populations. In the 2006 battles between Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hezbollah's Katyusha rocket attacks killed and wounded dozens of Israelis, destroyed property, and sent thousands to bomb shelters. The rain of rockets threatened to spark a larger regional conflict.

Another Rage of Rockets

The Russian incursion into Georgia last week saw the use of rockets in urban areas by both sides. According to reports in The New York Times, Georgia fired BM-21 rockets, a system similar to the Katyusha, at separatist military headquarters. Although the rockets appear to have been aimed at legitimate targets, the risk of damage to the surrounding civilian community from these inaccurate weapons may have been high. According to other press and eyewitness reports, during the massive Russian military offensive, ground troops fired dozens of SS-21s, a short-range ballistic missile that can carry a high-explosive warhead. It is not clear whether these weapons were fired at legitimate military targets. In addition, the large SS 21 high-explosive warhead can carry either fragmentation bombs or mines making the risk of civilian causalities in urban areas very high.

The Promise of Directed Energy

Despite repeated warning signs that both unconventional and conventional combatants have no problem using the weapons of war to target both military and civilian populations, the United States has shown little sense of urgency in developing effective countermeasures for either equipping military forces or safeguarding civilian populations.

Directed energy weapons, such as the Tactical High-Energy Laser (THEL), demonstrate tremendous potential against all kinds of mortar, artillery, rocket, aircraft, and missile threats. Directed energy can be used against short-range threats like the Katyusha rockets being fired at Israel and against ballistic missiles like the SS-21s fired at Georgia. Such systems could also be used for homeland security, such as protecting critical infrastructure, national security events (such as the presidential nominating conventions) and commercial air traffic from terrorist attack.

Concluding that the THEL was not sufficiently mobile and robust for battlefield use, the U.S. Army decided to forgo its full development. Meanwhile, though the Department of Homeland Security has experimented with some systems to defend commercial flights against surface-to-air missiles, it too has not deployed any operational systems.

The Clock Is Ticking

Rather than deploy the THEL, the national security community has turned to a new generation of lasers for developing suitable directed-energy protective systems. These lasers employ a solid-state technology, incorporating multiple industrial thin disk lasers into a single high-powered energy devise. The military is currently developing prototypes for a mobile version of this system.

Congress should insist and the administration should press to field operational prototypes of these systems as quickly as possible for both defense and homeland security applications. Both land-based and air-based platforms (mounted on manned and unmanned aircraft) should be fielded as soon as possible. Putting a system in the field now would provide some limited operational capability and invaluable operational experience on how to use these systems.

Courtesy of Heritage Foundation, read more at www.heritage.org

Richardson's Words on Iraq, Same Old Liberal Rhetoric

Bill Richardson seems to think that Iraq is not being given the attention it should. In a recent posting on the Huffington Post, the New Mexico Governor revealed his shock at the lack of attention paid to Iraq during the recent NPR Democratic forum in Iowa. His message was not new, too many soldiers, too much money. Gov. Richardson pointed out that with the surge going on in Iraq we are stifling what reconciliation might take place, and we are also limiting our military readiness by spreading our forces too thin. Maybe the Governor would like to talk with Bill Clinton about overseeing a significant draw down in forces during the 1990's. And for the reconciliation that would take place if we were not there, are forces are what is keeping the fragile country together and away from the hands of islamofascists. Instead Richardson bemoans our spending of money in Iraq instead of providing entitlements and preventing global warming. The Governor does get one thing right in his article. He manages to point out the inconsistency of his fellow candidates' message on Iraq. The have-it-both-ways crowd was shouting down our involvement in Iraq but would keep troops until 2013. As things improve in Iraq the key will be to see how the Democrats respond. Recent comments seem to suggest a hedging of their bets to capitalize on things if they go well, a far cry from previous statements denouncing the war as a hopeless and lost cause.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gov-bill-richardson/iraq-the-elephant-in-the_b_75881.html

Pajama Party Politics

I apologize for the lack of updates. I am trying to get through the last couple of days of my online college classes. I did want to make mention of an occurrence that transpired last week. For all of you who paid attention to Congress you witnessed the legislative slumber party initiated by Senator Harry Reid D-Nevada. The futile attempt to try and lead the country towards surrender failed and the Democrats were left with sour faces and an approval rating that reflects their do-nothing agenda so far. It is clear that the Democrats are unable to pull themselves from the radical left that seems to have a strangle hold on their party. For anyone who doubts this you need only to look at the fact that these fringe elements have daily conference calls with the Democrats and their leadership. The exercise last week was simply another attempt by Democrats to show that they were trying to pull us out of Iraq. The Democrats brought in cots to prepare for the long night of politicking. What we know is that even some on the Democrat's side wanted to call it a night and return to the issue in the morning. The whole thing was pointless and a waste of time which would describe the Democrat agenda up until know. These politicians do not even want to give General Petraeus until September to report back the progress on the ground like they agreed to do. I would say that the surge is really in its infancy and will need longer than September to show its full strength. But the Democrats are so anxious to put out of Iraq as they feel we have done enough. They also point out the fact that this war has taken longer than WWII. I would say that the war against Nazism was an easier war not only because it was tied to a country but because we had real support in the world and individuals who understood the threat. We do not enjoy such support in the present except for a few allies namely Great Britain. So the Democrats can hold their all-nighters and dramatic displays of ignorance and stupidity in an attempt to end the war in Iraq. They will not take the means they have to end the war by cutting off the funding. I mean if they were really serious about ending our occupation of Iraq like they tell their frenzied and radical supporters then why not go all the way? The answer is that they are all to comfortable to keep playing politics which is what they are best at. The sad part is that while it may make sense for the support around the world to have diminished considering the changing face of Europe and other countries it is a shame that we cannot turn to many of our fellow citizens for support within our own borders.

The Only Thing We Have to Fear is Fear Itself, and Radical Islam

I think that is probably how the statement would go had it been uttered in today's environment. I say this as a proud American who realizes the greatness of our country and its resolve to deal with any adversity and conquer it. But we must realize the threat that radical Islam poses to our country and democracy around the world. I fear our country's resolve to deal with this danger fell drastically as a result of the results of last November's election. The danger is a nation becoming complacent and fall into a false sense of security. This is especially possible when certain political forces play down the threat from radical Islam. I think that attitude comes from the fact that they do not see the risk of terrorists following us to our shores as credible. The fact is when you have people that want to destroy us and an unprotected border you have an equation with disaster on the other side of the equal sign. But we may not have to wait for those to follow us home from Iraq. As the situation at Fort Dix showed us terrorism can be homemade as terror cells populate within our borders. And if a certain political party keeps attacking and wanting to take away all our tactics to fight these terrorists, the peace we have had these past few years since 9/11 may go up in smoke, literally. If we take this attitude as has been adopted by so many then we really will have something to fear. The best strategy we have is to go on offense and take the fight to the enemy. But we must be willing to go all the way in this fight. Right now we have a leader who understands this, but it may change in the next election cycle. War fatigue is frankly not an option. We will not solve this problem in a year or two. With a seemingly growing crop of new radicals being brainwashed and cultivated our commitment is needed now more than ever. We were once a nation that put democracy on a pedestal as a model for other nations to follow. Unfortunately that pedestal has been losing its support as a result of comments and actions of some, and is not as firmly in place as it once was. We are attacked for wanting to give other nations the security, prosperity, and freedom we enjoy. It may be unrealistic to expect every nation to be our duplicate. But if they can escape the violence and persecution of the evil entities that control them is not our campaign a noble and necessary one? Because planting democracy over there might just save ours over here.