During the Cold War, the ballistic missile, whether equipped with nuclear warheads or not, was considered a reference unit for determining the military power of a country. At that time, there was no system capable of effectively intercepting this type of device, the simple possession of which therefore posed an existential threat to all States falling within the missile's range of action. It is for this reason that two of the main crises of this period, the Cuban crisis in 1962, and that of the Euromissiles in 1983, resulted from the deployment of these devices near state borders.
With the entry into service, at the end of the 80s, of new generation anti-aircraft systems, such as the American Patriot, this threat quickly faded, because the systematism it engendered disappeared with the deployment of anti-aircraft batteries. American missiles. Thus, during the first Gulf War, the simple deployment of Patriot missile batteries was enough to keep Tel Aviv from responding to Scud missile attacks coming from Iraq. In the post-Cold War years, anti-missile systems were perfected and extended their interception capabilities in the face of longer-range missiles. This is how the THAAD and new versions of the Patriot appeared in the United States, as well as the SM3 then SM6 missiles of the AEGIS on-board system. Together, these systems were capable of neutralizing a large portion of the short- and medium-range missiles that could be launched against the United States, its forces, and its allies. In addition, the United States deployed a very large number of Tomahawk cruise missiles on its naval and submarine platforms, so as to be able, if necessary, to eliminate the launchers in a first strike, as well as the anti-aircraft systems. air, freeing up the spaces necessary for the deployment of its air power. The short and medium range ballistic missile seemed, at that time, doomed to join the ranks of weapon systems made obsolete by technological progress.
But as is often the case, certainties and the status quo have favored the emergence of new technologies intended to supplant these defenses. This is how the Russian 9M723K1 missile appeared, better known as Iskander, or SS-N-26 Stone for NATO. This new tactical missile, with a range voluntarily limited to 490 km to respect the clauses of the INF treaty, used a new flight trajectory, called quasi-ballistic, more tense than those of traditional short and medium range ballistic missiles. In addition, most of the flight takes place at an altitude of 60 km, positioning itself perfectly between the ceiling of the Patriot at 60 km and the floor of the THAAD, which is 70 km away. The missile is also capable of maneuvering in flight, in a way that is difficult to predict. In fact, the interception of this missile quickly became problematic for US anti-missile defense. But relations with Moscow being good in 1995, there was no need to be alarmed.
The second alert, much more serious this time, came when President Putin presented the new strategic vectors developed by Russia during the Russian presidential campaign, in March 2018. A new missile, the Kh57M2 Kinzhal, swept aside all American certainties in matters effectiveness of the anti-missile shield. Airborne, the missile was both hypersonic, maneuverable, and operated within the altitude range of the Iskander, from which it was derived. In addition, its range, exceeding 2000 km according to Moscow, would allow it to strike all important NATO targets east of a London-Paris axis, without the Mig-31 which carries it having to leave Russian airspace. In other words, neither the Patriot PaC-3 recently purchased with billions of euros by 4 European countries, nor the THAAD, nor even the missiles of the Aegis systems installed on the anti-aircraft frigates of several navies of the NATO are unable to stop this missile. Even the very promising Aster 30 Block1NT would seem to be incapable of doing so, at least given the current specifications.
At the same time, Russia has developed a new generation of anti-missile systems, the S500 which, coupled with the S400, S350, Buk, Tor, Sosna and Pantsir anti-aircraft systems, would be able to provide very effective protection against NATO strikes against strategic installations and Russian forces, whether by cruise missiles or air attacks. For the first time in 3 decades, NATO lost the assurance of having air superiority against its adversary, as well as that of being able to protect its system in depth against targeted strikes.
Since then, the US Army like the US Air Force have launched several programs aimed at developing hypersonic missiles capable, too, of challenging Russian anti-aircraft defense, the abandonment of the INF treaty having removed the constraints which could still exist against these weapon systems. In addition, numerous anti-missile defense programs have emerged, notably based on laser systems, to try to deal with this threat, which affects both land and naval forces, with Russia developing the hypersonic anti-missile missile. Tzirkhon 3M22 ship, which is scheduled to enter service in 2021.
Furthermore, the fault revealed by the Iskander and the Kinjhal has been widely emulated, in China obviously, but also in Iran, and more recently, in North Korea, whose latest missile launches had the sole purpose of to show that it too had missiles capable of challenging the American anti-missile shield deployed in Guam, Japan and South Korea.
One thing is certain, in just a few years, the short and medium range ballistic missile has risen from its ashes, to once again establish itself as one of the strategic weapon systems in military arsenals. In addition to the United States, China and Russia, India, North Korea, South Korea, Pakistan, Iran, Ukraine, Turkey and Saudi Arabia have announced that they are developing security systems. this guy. If it's not an arms race, it still looks a lot like one. On the other hand, no European program aimed at developing this type of weapons system is currently underway.