|
 22
June 2006
 Will
NORAD go to DEFCON 1 in response?
The United States is
reacting with unprecedented "grave concern" (a term
reserved for extreme national security implications) over
North Korea's possible launch of a new missile.
This isn't a mild rhetorical rebuke. This response is
different.
It certainly appears that North Korea is threatening to
"launch" (according to the new Pentagon term being used
now instead of yesterday's "test" term) a missile over the
U.S. like it did over Japan a few years ago. Obviously
this is in retaliation for the U.S.'s recent numerous spy
plane overflights.
North Korea has repeatedly said it was "entitled" to
launch a pre-emptive nuke attack against America.
The U.S. government is making it clear to its allies in
the region that such a missile launch will be viewed as a
provocative act.
U.S. officials, while
admitting they have limited missile defenses, have allowed
that those defenses in place may be used to shoot down any
incoming North Korean missile.
Officials have
pointedly used the term "launch" rather than "test" to
describe the North Korean preparations and said
Pyongyang's intentions were not clear.
North Korea last tested
a long range missile in 1998 when it fired a two-stage
Taepodong missile over Japan, causing an international
furor.
It declared a
moratorium on flight tests of long range missiles in 1999
but said in 2005 that it would no longer keep to it.
As early as 2004, U.S. intelligence reported that North
Korea may have a Taepodong-2 missile capable of reaching
the United States with a nuclear-weapon sized payload
ready for flight testing.
U.S. military
intelligence believes a two-stage Taepodong-2 missile
could reach the United States, while a three-stage
Taepodong-2 could range the entire continental United
States."
It is possible,
officials acknowledge quietly, that a North Korean missile
- even one intended to overfly the U.S. - could miss its
target and land on U.S. territory. Or it is entirely
possible that North Korea intends for such a missile to
strike the U.S. - to test its resolve.
How would the U.S.
respond to such an attack - intended or unintended?
Obviously, one of the
responses could be a nuclear counterstrike.
"Launch on warning" is
still official U.S. policy - meaning, when the U.S.
detects incoming missiles, it fires nuclear missiles in
response. NORAD would hit DEFCON 1 and likely launch the
counterstrike without much hesitation since no one would
know what kind of payload is carried by the missile.
Alternatively, the president may assess the situation as
being within his "pre-emptive" policy and order a nuclear
strike before North Korea can launch.
 Defense readiness
conditions (DEFCONs) describe progressive alert postures
primarily for use between the Joint Chiefs of Staff and
the commanders of unified commands.
DEFCON 1:
AIR
DEFENSE EMERGENCY:
Air defense emergency is an emergency condition, declared
by the Commander in Chief, North American Aerospace
Defense Command. It indicates that attack upon the
continental United States, Canada, or US installations in
Greenland by hostile aircraft or missiles is considered
probable, is imminent, or is taking place.
The U.S. has never gone
to DEFCON 1 (at least publicly).
During
the Cuban Missile Crisis, the U.S. Strategic Air Command
was placed on DEFCON 2 for the first time in history,
while the rest of U.S. military commands (with the
exception of the US Air Forces in Europe) went on DEFCON
3.
DEFCON 5
Normal peacetime readiness
DEFCON 4
Normal,
increased intelligence and strengthened security measures
DEFCON 3
Increase in force readiness above normal readiness
DEFCON 2
Further Increase in force readiness, but less than maximum
readiness
DEFCON 1
Maximum
force readiness.
A. Clerkin
|
