Hypersonic weapons are one of the emerging technologies that have unprecedented potential to disrupt warfare both in the present and the future, as they become more mature through scientific development and actual battlefield use. China and Russia are the leading nations in hypersonic weapons technology, possessing readily deployable units. As far as Russia is concerned, it has used its Zircon and Kinzhal hypersonic weapons in actual battlefields during the war in Ukraine. Although China has not used a hypersonic weapon itself in a battlefield, Pakistan’s use of a Chinese hypersonic weapon, the CM-400AKG, against an S-400 battery in the recent Pak-India standoff could provide invaluable data about the weapon and its impacts on strategic calculations.
BMD could be an attempt to minimize India’s vulnerability to Pakistani missile strikes.
At the strategic long-range level, there is a consensus among scholars and experts that conventional ballistic missiles with modern capabilities such as MIRVs, ballistic missiles with terminal maneuverability, and decoys already provide sufficient strike capabilities to bypass theatre and point defense Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) systems; making them a better option when compared to modern hypersonic weapons such as Hypersonic Glide Vehicles (HGVs) and Hypersonic Cruise Missiles (HCMs).
Hypersonic weapons at long ranges have to overcome challenges that are absent in the traditional ballistic missile parabolic flight – these include exponential heat and air-drag, both of which are functions of atmospheric flight. In addition to that, the energy loss caused by active maneuvers by the hypersonic weapon can slow down the weapon and reduce its effectiveness. To add to the complexity, hypersonic weapons need more sophisticated engineering and comparatively larger funding.
That being said, hypersonic weapons can be deadly in theatre and tactical levels where target distances are manageable. Specifically, a hypersonic weapon can rely on its speed, which crosses Mach 5, or 1500 meters per second, and major evasive maneuvers, to put point defenses, moving targets, and naval assets at grave risk.
The important aspect that relates to the notion of strategic stability is the effectiveness of hypersonic weapons against BMD systems. BMDs negatively impact strategic stability by undermining the concept of mutual vulnerability, which extends to Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD), and therefore affects deterrence stability. Dr. Zafar Nawaz Jaspal argues that India’s acquisition of BMD systems may induce a false sense of security in its strategic calculations vis-à-vis Pakistan and increase the temptations of toying with the idea of a First-Strike. In his words, he says, “BMD could be an attempt to minimize India’s vulnerability to Pakistani missile strikes.”
Pakistan’s use of the CM-400AKG re-asserts India’s vulnerability and minimizes the destabilizing effects of its purported BMD program.
Pakistan’s use of the CM-400AKG and its success in destroying an S-400 radar reasserts India’s vulnerability and minimizes the destabilizing effects of its purported BMD program. A report by Army Recognition also recognizes the concern that the strike could diminish the securing impact of BMDs. “If these systems are capable of bypassing the S-400, a system engineered with multi-band radar networks and advanced interception missiles, there is growing concern that even the most advanced U.S. and European defenses may require substantial upgrades to remain credible.”
Nonetheless, the notion of invulnerability surrounding BMD systems has been subject to skepticism for a long time. A report by the Keil Institute recognizes Ukrainian limitations in missile defense, according to which, a single patriot battery equipped with 32 launchers needs to fire all of its interceptor missiles to even have a chance to intercept one hypersonic weapon. In this context, the financial and logistical costs of defense alone seem overinflated and discouraging as far as the optimism around the BMD systems is concerned.
Annie Jacobson also alluded to the fantasy surrounding the US interceptor systems, highlighting that the US interceptor systems have a reported success rate of 45 percent, which is awfully inadequate when it comes to avoiding obliteration by nuclear weapons. James M. Acton has also pointed out the ‘unrealistic’ nature of interceptor tests conducted by the Missile Defense Agency (MDA). The recent use of the CM-400AKG may not be the last nail in the coffin for BMDs, but it has certainly amplified the doubts regarding their effectiveness. Even Western sources have begun acknowledging the severe limitations and handicaps faced by these systems.
Interestingly, military planners still seem to be convinced about the efficacy of BMD systems as countries continue to focus on developing more sophisticated BMD systems. The most recent development in this regard is Donald Trump’s announcement of the “Golden Dome”, which can admittedly counter emerging missile threats such as space-launched missiles. That is yet to be ascertained after the BMD becomes operational.
The notion of invulnerability surrounding BMD systems has been subject to skepticism for a long time.
However, previous attempts to counter similar emerging missile related threats, such as the US withdrawal from the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty only amplified arms race dynamics between the US and its rivals i.e. Russia and China, and it proved to be a bad decision as after 23 years from the withdrawal, the US is yet to possess adequate countermeasures vis-à-vis Russian and Chinese ballistic and hypersonic missiles.
The case with the Golden Dome may be the same; the announced completion date of the project is 2029, but that remains an estimate since programs with this degree of sophistication almost always face delays. Chances are that by the time the Golden Dome attains operational capability, offensive weapons will also undergo advancement phases, which can increasingly jeopardize the effectiveness of BMD systems even in the future.
Hypersonic weapons continue to raise questions about the adequacy of BMD systems and may induce a stabilizing effect on strategic calculations.
Hypersonic weapons continue to raise questions about the adequacy of BMD systems, and to that extent, may induce a stabilizing effect on strategic calculations, becoming increasingly a cornerstone of deterrence and strategic stability. The skepticism surrounding the BMDs’ true efficacy continues to grow, and modern-day munitions will prove a tough match for the modern-day defense.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author. They do not represent the views, beliefs, or policies of the Stratheia.
