Introduction

The public debate surrounding Norway’s air defense capabilities and requirements is ongoing. However, it is crucial to clarify the terminology often used in these discussions.

Key Questions

Should Norway invest in long-range air defense systems capable of intercepting traditional manned and unmanned aircraft, as well as cruise missiles, at extended distances? Or is the primary focus on defending against tactical ballistic missiles? These are distinct questions, not two sides of the same coin. While official documents suggest the latter, the term “long-range air defense” is more commonly used in public discourse.

The Question of Ballistic Missile Defense

Should Norway establish a credible defense against tactical ballistic missiles? This is yet another separate consideration.

Limitations of Long-Range Air Defense

Currently, the scope of “long-range air defense,” often referred to as two or maybe three systems, primarily represents a symbolic capability. These few systems are envisioned to be dispersed widely across the country to cover two nationally significant locations. However, this class of systems must be deployed very close to the protected object to ensure a high probability of intercept.

Key Points

• This type of air defense coverage has nothing to do with long ranges; intercepting tactical ballistic missiles occurs close to the target.
• Deploying only one system per protected object is vulnerable, especially if the direction of incoming missiles cannot be predicted early enough. Current systems often lack 360-degree coverage; multiple systems are required to defend an object from all directions.

Figure: US DoD’s Doctrinal Perspective

This figure from a US field manual illustrates their doctrinal thinking on this matter. Six systems are deployed relatively close together to protect a single “area/object.”

Beyond Ballistic Missiles

An attack on our assets would likely involve a cocktail of weapon types, not just a few ballistic missiles, to ensure some reach their target because the defender (us) becomes saturated or lacks coverage in all sectors and altitudes.

Conclusion

The debate surrounding Norway’s air defense needs careful consideration of the specific threats and the capabilities of different systems. Long-range air defense, while often used as a general term, has limitations when it comes to intercepting ballistic missiles. A comprehensive defense strategy should consider various threats and employ a layered approach to protect critical assets.