33 Minutes

Last night, the Heritage Foundation hosted a screening of their documentary on the modern state of missile threats to the United States.  It was followed by an informative Q&A with Producer Rebecca Hagelin, Kim Holmes, and James Carafano.  Here are some thoughts I took from the evening: 

Americans from a diversity of ideological prospectives should give pause and consider the degree of their own knowledge concerning the tactical capabilities of terrorists and rogue regimes. What do we know about those who would harm us?  What do we know about what they can do? 

The American attention span on any issue has historically been short but producer Rebecca Hagelin has created a film that can engage Americans with the gravity of the need for missile defense.

"33 Minutes" is a documentary with an important message about how America defends itself against ballistic missile attacks from rogue states and terrorist organizations.  Though one of the more likely and deadly forms of the next 9/11, the American public is ill informed about ballistic missile attack and our strategy to defend ourselves against it.  Namely, "Layered Missile Defense".  There will be a cost to our ignorance and a cost to our silence if Washington is allowed to ignore this threat.

When we see a well made film that we agree with, we call it "good art"; when we see a good film that we do not agree with, we call it "propaganda."

For those who use the label "fear monger" to excuse themselves from intellectually engaging in the missile defense debate, it is time to examine the facts.  The first few minutes of the film take us with speed and accuracy backwards on the timeline of our nations history with the intensity and intrigue of TV’s "24" while simultaneously and accurately contextualizing how the US came to its present strategic defense posture.

From there, any American from any walk of life can digest and discern the seriousness of what are ultimately defense budget decisions made in Washington.  Such decisions should transcend politics and be driven by an informed public.  "33 Minutes" serves this purpose.

From this perspective, the call for a layered defense makes a lot of sense.  First, a ballistic missile attack is likely and plausible.  Today we face several enemies who openly declare their desire to use ballistic missiles against the United States and her allies.  It is the responsibility of the Missile Defense Agency to deter and counter this threat.

One "myth busting" quality of "33 Minutes" is how it makes clear that the MDA has developed the technology to do this.  If the United States falls victim to a missile attack it will be due to a lack of funding from Washington and not a failure of the vigilance of the MDA.  When missle defense was in its infancy skeptics openly scoffed, "How can you hit a bullet with a bullet?" To that General Trey Obering, director of the MDA, replies, "we [now] have the technology to hit a spot on a bullet." 

MDA calls its layered defense the Family of Systems approach.  There are sea based systems and ground based systems for intercepting ballistic missiles.  Satellite and airborne systems are far along in development and technology though poorly funded.  Each system has its own tracking and targeting system.

The reason they call it a "family system" or a "layered defense" is that the tracking and targeting systems of each layer of technology enhance each others accuracy.  So, for example, having an operational Airborne Laser system and a ground based system give the sea based interceptor more timely and accurate information with which to do its job.  Inversely, if the sea based interceptor misses, you could still have a satellite, airborne, and ground based capability.  In other words, a fully funded layered defense could have four or five chances to stop a missile. 

33 Minutes is informative.  Czech ambassador Petr Kolar, and former director of the Soviet weapons program, Dr. Kenneth Alibek, are especially compelling.  Their perspectives of the history and political context of ballistic missile threat add something that we both lack and need.  We have good allies in Eastern Europe because of our common defense interests.  Yet, signals of waning commitment to our missile defense agreements have recently caused the lower house of the Czech parliament to refuse ratification of our latest agreement despite its passage in their senate. 

The film is meant to inform and inspire advocacy for an appropriately funded missile defense program.  It explains the threat. It shows where we are and it shows where we should be.  It is done well. 

Yet, there is a threat scenario left out of the film that James Carafano addressed in the Q&A where a terrorist group obtains a ballistic missile from a rogue regime, smuggles it aboard a merchant ship, and fires it just a few mile off the US coastline.  This would take much less than 33 minutes.  Currently, the US does not have the capability to defend against such a short range launch. MDA though does have a technology in final testing phase could counter such a threat.  It is called the airborne laser system and unfortunately it is not likely to be well funded this year. 

For more information, see https://www.heritage.org/33-minutes

Watch the trailer below: