If the United States wants to create a missile defense system with Gulf Cooperation Council countries in the Middle East, policy changes will be necessary to enable the integration of U.S. sensors and command and control systems with that of partner nations, former U.S. officials said on Sept. 10.
Patriot air and missile defense system. Raytheon won a $2 billion order from Saudi Arabia for the system and on the week of Sept. 7 Poland selected Patriot to provide air and missile defense. Photo: Raytheon
“Despite the enormous amount of money and assets placed into the region, our ability to fight as a coalition is less now than it was a decade ago,” said Michael Tronolone, the former U.S. director for Central Command’s integrated air and missile defense center of excellence.
There is a greater array of U.S. and allied missile defense assets in the Middle East than ever before, he said. But while U.S. systems are tied together on a classified network that provides a common operational picture, they are stovepiped separately from the assets of countries like Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates.
That wasn’t always the case. In 2003, the U.S. military could integrate its Patriot surface-to-air missile systems with Kuwait’s system, he said. It can’t now due to “policy implications.”
“The number one challenge we face is not technology. It’s not cost. It’s policy,” he said. “We have to break down the policy barriers in order to get through and integrate the things we already have.”
Integrating sensors and command and control systems would “exponentially” increase U.S. capability, he said. Regional maintenance and logistical support, and multilateral training with GGC nations also need to be priorities.
Air Force Brig. Gen. Kenneth Todorov, a former Missile Defense Agency deputy director, agreed that greater cooperation is needed.
“I think a good place to start…is with shared early warning,” he said. “Let’s not solve world hunger. Let’s start with a problem we know how to solve.”
Tronolone said the State and Defense departments need an advocate who can break down “mid-level barriers” and help change policy, “We need, I would argue, a tiger team or a workforce set up to push this through, otherwise we’re just going to continue to have great words and great discussions.”
Todorov argued that there is growing momentum within the Pentagon for greater cooperation, especially among senior leaders who have realized the need to break down policy roadblocks.
“I don’t know if there’s a person” working specifically on this, he said. “But I know that at very high levels at the department, the light bulbs have come on.”
What will be harder is figuring out how to break down those barriers without leaving the United States vulnerable, he said.
Tronolone agreed that cyber threats, especially, need to be a concern going forward as the U.S. military integrates their missile defense systems with those of other countries.
“But I believe there are technological systems in place that will…allow us to share that data both in peace time and in contingency, where we can dial up and dial down what we want to share and who we want to share that with, and that we have the capability to protect that system and architecture,” he said.