Cold War Treaty Puts U.S. in Corner Over China

The Cold War's most successful arms control agreement is imperiling U.S. forces and increasing the probability of a conflict in Asia.

The U.S.-Soviet Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty contributed to stability in Europe during the Cold War's final years by eliminating both nuclear and conventionally armed ground-launched cruise and ballistic missiles with ranges of between 500 and 5,500 kilometers.

Now, however, the treaty is preventing the U.S. and Russia from responding to a growing threat from China, which has been expanding its missile force at an unparalleled rate. China now has at least hundreds of ground-launched intermediate-range missiles. By comparison, Russia and the U.S. have none.

The last time Americans worried about a "missile gap" - a phrase consigned to history along with the Soviet Union - Gerald Ford was U.S. president, Berlin was a divided city and Taiwan was a U.S. treaty ally. With the Cold War's end and the emergence of a unipolar era, Americans, it was supposed, no longer needed to worry about comparing numbers of tanks, bombers and missiles.

But while Washington and Moscow were busy eliminating entire classes of missiles and with good reason, on the other side of the Eurasian land mass Beijing was investing in missile technology. Today, missiles play a central role in Chinese military strategy. And so, 20 years after the Soviet Union's dissolution, the U.S. is once again facing a missile gap, and unlike the missile gaps of the Cold War, there is no question as to this one's existence.

Why does this matter? The U.S.-China missile gap (and the Sino-Russian one, as well) creates strategic instability in a way that the perceived Cold War missile gaps never did. With its ground-based missiles, China can target U.S. and allied bases in the Asia-Pacific as far away as Guam, including key U.S. facilities in South Korea and Japan.

With its new anti-ship ballistic missile, also ground-launched, the People's Liberation Army will likewise be able to attack U.S. aircraft carriers and other capital ships at sea.

Because the U.S. cannot field intermediate-range missiles, it could not respond in kind to a missile strike on regional assets. Instead, it would have two options. It could rely on tactical fighters to carry out retaliatory strikes. Or, it could rely on longer-range options such as bombers or prompt global strike munitions (basically, conventionally armed intercontinental-range missiles).

Given Russia's lack of intermediate-range missiles, it would have similar options in responding to a Chinese missile attack.

The first option is highly escalatory because it involves an infringement of Chinese territorial integrity by a presumably large fighter force. It puts a higher number of American lives at risk and would engage a wider array of Chinese forces than a simpler tit-for-tat retaliatory missile strike. And reliance on tactical aircraft to respond to Chinese missile strikes could be problematic because those strikes might well have rendered U.S. airbases and aircraft carriers unusable, or worse.

Option two is potentially even more escalatory. Bombers and long-range missiles, after all, look an awful lot like nuclear delivery vehicles. China might very well be incapable of determining with what an incoming bomber or missile was armed. It is an open question whether Beijing would wait to find out before deciding how to respond.

Fortunately, the solution to this conundrum is quite clear. First, Washington and Moscow should invite Beijing (as well as other Asian states) to accede to the INF Treaty, or some updated version of it. If the Chinese decline the invitation, Russia and the U.S. should agree to abrogate the treaty while also agreeing to keep Europe free of those weapons, where a missile buildup would needlessly destabilize a largely stable region.

The U.S. military, and the Russian military if it desires, should then begin a spirited buildup of its own ground-based intermediate-range missile force in Asia.

Although counterintuitive, this would contribute to strategic stability. By developing more options for proportional responses to a Chinese military strike, the U.S. military would make escalation management an easier task, thus making vertical escalation much less likely. Such a move would also give Beijing incentive to sign up to a new INF treaty, as the value of its own missiles would be greatly diminished by a balanced U.S. missile force.

If other Asian states begin fielding theater-range ballistic missiles in large numbers as well - a likely scenario given their affordability and obvious merits - the need for a regionwide INF treaty would become apparent even to the Chinese.

But unless and until the U.S. narrows its missile gap with China, stability in Asia will continue to erode.

Michael Mazza is senior research associate, Foreign & Defense Policy Studies, at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

DoD OKs Army's $5.7B Aircraft Survivability Effort

The Pentagon has signed off on the U.S. Army's plan to spend $5.7 billion on anti-missile defenses for helicopters.

THE PENTAGON HAS signed off on a $5.7 billion anti-missile defense plan for helicopters like this CH-47. (Sgt. Dennis W. Jackson / U.S. Army)

In a Dec. 28 memo, acting Pentagon acquisition chief Frank Kendall gave the service permission to begin the technology development phase for the Common Infrared Countermeasure (CIRCM) program.

Infrared countermeasures are used to confuse incoming missiles' guidance systems and thereby protect aircraft from being hit.

Attached to Kendall's memo was a cost chart for the CIRCM program produced by the Defense Department's Cost Assessment Program Evaluation (CAPE) office, a group within the Office of the Secretary of Defense that provides independent cost estimates and advice for DoD decision-makers.

According to the chart, the total acquisition cost for the program is $5.7 billion. That includes $815 million for research and development, $3.3 billion for procurement and $1.6 billion in operation and support costs.

Kendall says the Army is to keep funding for the program under $225 million per year. Procurement of the systems does not begin to ramp up until 2017, according to the CAPE chart.

CAPE has estimated an average unit procurement cost for the system of $2.5 million.

Kendall's memo indicates that he has also approved the criteria that will be used to determine whether the program has successfully completed its development phase.

There are several companies competing for the technology development part of the program, including Northrop Grumman, BAE Systems, ITT, Lockheed Martin and Raytheon.

CIRCM is intended as an improved, lighter-weight version of Advanced Threat Infrared Countermeasures (ATIRCM), which was canceled and restructured after the Pentagon and Army officials determined the ATIRCM system to be too heavy for any helicopter other than the CH-47 Chinook.

After this discovery, the Pentagon and Army decided to reduce the ATIRCM buy, causing a breach of the Nunn-McCurdy statute, which requires the Pentagon to notify Congress when major defense programs experience substantial cost growth.

The Army declared a critical Nunn-McCurdy breach for ATIRCM in March 2010.

However, the Army was given permission to buy 83 ATIRCM systems to respond to an urgent request for CH-47s flying in Afghanistan.

The Missile Defense Answer to Iran

As the past three years have shown, President Barack Obama and his predecessor, George W. Bush, don't often see eye-to-eye on foreign policy. On at least one issue, however, the two appear to be in full agreement. Both have stated clearly and repeatedly that the radical, revolutionary regime that rules Iran must not be permitted to acquire nuclear weapons.

And yet, neither the current president nor the previous one made serious headway on this most serious of national security challenges.

The time to do so is running out. As the most recent International Atomic Energy Agency report makes painfully clear, Iran is perilously close to crossing the nuclear threshold, and its intentions are anything but peaceful. The U.S. desperately needs a strategy to keep the fingers of Iran's ayatollahs off the nuclear trigger. For a nuclear-armed Iran - oil-rich, bellicose and ambitious - would change the 21st century in ways we can only begin to imagine.

Those who don't believe we can stop Iran from crossing the nuclear Rubicon, as well as those who minimize the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran, have taken to talking about "containment." But the clerical regime that rules Tehran will not be as easy to keep in a box as was the Soviet Union.

The leaders of the Soviet empire may have been evil, but they were not irrational. As a result, they chose to abide by the "balance of terror" that emerged over time with the U.S., backing away from thermonuclear confrontation even as they competed with America for primacy in the political theaters of Latin America, Africa and beyond.

Whether Iran will be willing to honor such a bargain is very much an open question. At least one segment of the Iranian leadership ascribes to a radical revisionist (even apocalyptic) world-view, one which requires and embraces confrontation with the West.

And while Iran's clerical army, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, casts a growing shadow over politics within the Islamic Republic, recent provocations, such as the botched attempt to assassinate Saudi Arabia's envoy to the U.S. in Washington, suggest the Guards themselves are anything but risk averse.

All of this implies that we will be forced to rely on more than deterrence and the threat of mutually assured destruction to contain Iran. We also will need to make it as difficult as possible for the Iranians to use nuclear weapons, or even to credibly threaten to do so.

This can only be achieved by developing, as an integral component of a containment regime, a comprehensive missile defense system composed of space-based, sea-based and land-based defenses. Such a system would make it doubtful, if not impossible, for Iran to successfully fire a missile against the American homeland, American troops abroad or America's allies and be confident that the weapon would reach its intended victims.

Fortunately, the U.S. has the ability to defend against this threat. Since at least the early 1990s, America has possessed the technological know-how to erect a comprehensive national defense against enemy ballistic missiles in all phases of flight. But for just as long, we have lacked the political will to do so.

Today, the state of affairs is much the same. The four-phase missile defense plan unveiled by the White House in September 2009 has a good deal to commend it, including major investments in sea-based defenses and the protection of allies abroad.

But it also suffers from potentially fatal deficiencies, chief among them the fact that it mortgages defense of the U.S. homeland until 2016 or later, when Obama will no longer be in office, even if he wins re-election next November. By doing so, it leaves the U.S. a provocatively weak and inviting target to adversaries who seek to do us harm, Iran chief among them.

Policymakers in Washington are hotly debating what, exactly, should be done to thwart the Islamic Republic and its stubborn quest for a nuclear capability. As they do, they should focus on missile defense as part of the logical answer. Anyone who seriously favors containment must also seriously favor comprehensive missile defense as a way of ensuring that Tehran's opportunities for aggression are limited. But others should favor this course of action as well.

Of course, it would be best to stop Iran's drive for nuclear weapons or to see the current regime replaced by one less bellicose. And it would be good to slow Iran's drive to nuclear weapons for as long as possible. But should all else fail, contingency plans must be in place to better protect Americans from the world's most active state sponsor of terrorism, which is now on the verge of acquiring the world's most dangerous weapons. America has the means to defend itself from Iranian nuclear missiles; it just needs to make such a plan a reality.

Ilan Berman is vice president of the American Foreign Policy Council. Clifford May is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Both are members of the Independent Working Group on Missile Defense.

Israel and U.S. to Hold Joint Missile Drill

JERUSALEM - Israel and the United States are to hold a joint missile defense exercise, the Israeli military said late Jan. 5.

Although the exercise, codenamed "Austere Challenge 12," comes at a time of spiraling regional tensions over Iran's suspected nuclear arms program, the army said the maneuvers were planned in advance.

"The exercise scenario involves notional, simulated events as well as some field training and is not in response to any real-world event," the military said in a written response to an AFP query

"The U.S. European Command and the Israel Defence Forces periodically conduct routine exercises in Israel. These exercises, which are part of along-standing strategic partnership, are planned in advance and part of a routine training cycle designed to improve the interoperability of our defence systems."

It did not say when the exercise would take place. Local media said that it would get underway in the spring and would be the biggest ever joint maneuvers between the two allies.

Israel and the United States have a longstanding strategic alliance and are jointly developing the Arrow anti ballistic missile system.

In November the Jewish state staged a major civil defense drill in the Tel Aviv region aimed at simulating a response to conventional and non-conventional missile attacks.

Although Iran says its nuclear program is for civilian use only, the international community believes it is striving to acquire nuclear arms and Israel says that it is a prime target of the Islamic republic.

Iran has threatened to close the strategic Strait of Hormuz, through which 20 percent of the world's oil flows, if it is hit with sanctions, and has warned the United States not to send an aircraft carrier back into the Gulf.

Last week it test-fired three missiles during war games east of the strait at the entrance to the Gulf.

Helsinki OKs Patriot Missile Shipment to S. Korea

HELSINKI - Sixty-nine Patriot missiles impounded in Finland after being found on a merchant vessel in mid-December were headed for South Korea, the Finnish government said Jan. 4, granting their transit through Finnish territory.

"The missiles in question had been sold to the Republic of Korea by Germany," the government said in a statement, adding that it had granted a license to Seoul's "Defense Acquisition Program Administration to transit through Finnish territory 69 Patriot missiles."

The surface-to-air missiles, produced by U.S. firm Raytheon, were discovered on December 15 aboard the British-registered Thor Liberty docked in the southeastern Finnish port of Kotka.

Confusion initially surrounded the shipment.

Finnish police said the goods were bound for China but did not have the necessary authorization to pass through Finland, while a German defense ministry spokesman said the missiles came from the German military and were destined for South Korea.

The spokesman said it was a "legal sale on the basis of an accord between two states at the government level" and that export authorizations were in order.

However a senior Finnish defense ministry official said Finland had not received any transit license application for the missiles from Germany.

A joint team of Finnish customs and police officials removed and impounded the missiles during an investigation for suspected illegal export of defense material.

The vessel's Ukrainian captain and first mate were also detained for questioning and later slapped with a travel ban which is still in effect.

Last week the customs service said it planned to widen the investigation.

"Next week ... we will want to hear more suspects or persons of interest in the case. It is possible there may be others of interest," the head of the Finnish customs anti-crime unit, Petri Lounatmaa, told AFP.

Finnish transport safety officials have cleared the Thor Liberty to leave Finland, but the vessel has remained in port due to the travel ban imposed on its first officers, and the removal of its cargo.

Mideast Weapon Sales Part of Long-Term Plan: U.S.

The final days of 2011 saw the Obama administration finalize two important weapon sales with countries in the Middle East: a $3.48 billion sale of a Lockheed Martin-made missile defense system to the United Arab Emirates, and a $29.4 billion sale of Boeing-made F-15 fighter jets to Saudi Arabia.

While the announcements come as tensions between the United States and Iran continue to rise over a dispute regarding access to the Strait of Hormuz, the deals themselves are not meant to address current events, State Department officials said.

The F-15 deal was finalized with Saudi Arabia on Dec. 24. However, the White House first notified Congress of that sale, which includes 84 new aircraft and the modernization of 70 existing aircraft as well as missiles, spare parts, training, maintenance and logistics, in October 2010.

During a Dec. 30 State Department news conference, Andrew Shapiro, assistant secretary of state for political-military affairs, told reporters that the deal was not directed toward Iran, adding that work on the sale precedes the latest news out of the region.

"We did not gin up a package based on current events in the region," he said.

Over the last several weeks, the United States and Iran have stepped up the economic and military pressure on each other, with the latest threat coming from Iran, which warned the United States not to return one of its aircraft carriers to the gulf.

On Jan. 3, the Pentagon dismissed Iran's warnings.

"The deployment of U.S. military assets in the Persian Gulf region will continue as it has for decades," Pentagon Press Secretary George Little said in a statement. "Our transits of the Strait of Hormuz continue to be in compliance with international law, which guarantees our vessels the right of transit passage."

Meanwhile, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Wendy Sherman is on a four-day trip to Saudi Arabia and the UAE.

"While in the gulf region, she will consult with senior Saudi and Emirati officials on a wide range of bilateral and regional issues," according to the State Department. Her trip "further illustrates the robust strategic relationship the United States shares with both Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates."

While the latest sales to the Middle East are being placed in this geopolitical context, the late December announcements are not tied to the escalating tensions, but part of a longer-term security plan, said Danny Sebright, president of the U.S.-UAE Business Council and a counselor at the Cohen Group, Washington.

"The overall sales with regard to both countries are definitely the result of a long-term concern with Iranian intentions, a long-term concern with wanting to improve individual countries' defense capabilities," Sebright said. "But, is the announcement of these two deals specifically tied to Iran? I would say no to that. I would say it's much more about internal decision-making in both countries - some with regard to terms and conditions of the sale, some with regard to budgeting, and some with regard to the Arab Spring."

According to Sebright, the United States gave the formal Letter of Offer and Acceptance to Saudi Arabia last spring and the Saudi government has been holding on to it until it was ready to sign.

"The basic deal had all but been done over a year ago, but they waited for internal and external reasons," he said.

A State Department official said, "While we decline to get into the specifics on the negotiations, the timeline here is not particularly atypical. A sale of this magnitude and complexity required close, continual consultations with our Saudi and industry partners to sort out the details."

Congress was first notified of the plan to sell UAE the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense System (THAAD) in September 2008. After negotiating the details of the contract, the United States and UAE signed the THAAD deal on Dec. 25. Lockheed Martin is on contract for four THAAD batteries for the U.S. Army, but the UAE deal is the program's first foreign sale.

Lockheed Martin's portion of the $3.48 billion sale is $1.96 billion. The overall deal includes two THAAD batteries, 96 missiles, two AN/TPY-2 radars, and 30 years of spare parts, support, and training to the UAE, according to the Pentagon.

Since the 2008 congressional notification, UAE trimmed the buy.

At first it was expected the country would buy three THAAD fire units, 147 missiles, and four radar sets for an estimated value of $6.95 billion.

The United Arab Emirates has asked Lockheed not to publicly discuss the delivery schedule of the weapon system, said Dennis Cavin, vice president of corporate business development at Lockheed Martin.

"This sale is an important step in improving the region's security through a regional missile defense architecture, and follows a number of recent ballistic missile defense-related sales," Little said in a Dec. 30 statement.

Sales from earlier in the year include a $1.7 billion direct commercial sales contract to upgrade Saudi Arabia's Patriot missiles and the sale of 209 Patriot GEM-T missiles to Kuwait, valued at about $900 million.

Loren Thompson, a defense analyst at the Lexington Institute, also put the sale in the context of December's announcement that Iraq would buy Lockheed's F-16s and Oman's decision to double the size of its F-16 fleet.

"When combined with the modernization of the Saudi Air Force and the extensive F-16 inventory of the United Arab Emirates, it is clear Arab gulf states will be positioned to greatly outmatch the antiquated tactical aircraft fleet of Iran," he wrote in a blog for Forbes.

According to Lockheed Martin, demand for missile defense capabilities continues to climb around the world.

"With regional threats in the Middle East and the uncertainties of what's going on in North Korea, demand for a very capable missile defense system has never been stronger," Cavin said. "The U.S. government is in discussion with a number of countries who have expressed interest in the THAAD, but we'd prefer that the Missile Defense Agency address any specifics with regard to which countries have contacted them."

The Missile Defense Agency declined to provide further details.

In announcing the Saudi deal, the State Department emphasized it would improve interoperability between the Saudi and American air forces.

In addition to greater cooperation with the United States, the sales also bolster internal cooperation among the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, which include Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the UAE, Sebright said.

The gulf countries have taken more steps to improve internal coordination and work toward multilateral defense policies in the last year than they have over the last 25, he said.

Lockheed Wins Contract for UAE Anti-Missile System

Washington - The Pentagon awarded U.S. defense giant Lockheed Martin Corp. with a $1.96 billion contract Dec. 30 to supply the United Arab Emirates with a missile defense system.

Under the contract, Lockheed will deliver two Terminal High Altitude Area Defense or Thaad systems that include radar, interceptors and launchers, according to a Pentagon statement.

The project is part of President Barack Obama's plans to build up a regional defense in the Middle East to counter Iran's growing arsenal of ballistic missiles.

Under the plan, land-based interceptors would be tied in with a detection network on U.S. Navy Aegis-class warships.

UAE is the first country to purchase the expensive Thaad system.

The announcement came amid rising tensions with Iran and a day after the United States confirmed the signing of a $30 billion arms deal to provide another Gulf ally - Saudi Arabia - with 84 new fighter jets.

Boeing Wins Contract for U.S. Missile Shield

WASHINGTON - Boeing won a $3.48 billion contract to retain its leading role in building a U.S. shield against long-range ballistic missiles, defeating rival Lockheed Martin Corp., officials said Dec. 30.

The U.S. Missile Defense Agency announced the decision for the seven-year contract in which Boeing will test, engineer and manufacture the system designed to thwart potential attacks from intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Chicago-based Boeing was joined by partner Northrop Grumman, which will oversee the ground system and other aspects of the project, Boeing said in a statement.

Boeing offered "innovative solutions and a cost-effective approach to program management and execution," said Dennis Muilenburg, president and CEO of Boeing Defense, Space and Security.

Lockheed, based in Bethesda, Md., had hoped to edge out Boeing, which has been the prime contractor for the anti-missile program since 2001.

The ground-based mid-course missile defense system has had a mixed record on missile tests, with two failures in 2010. The program has also faced cost overruns due to faulty parts, and the Pentagon is now requiring contractors to absorb the cost of defects in the future.

Finland to Widen Missile Shipment Inquiry: Customs

HELSINKI - Finland wants to widen an inquiry into the illegal transit of 69 Patriot missiles through its territory aboard a regular merchant vessel, Finnish customs said Dec. 30.

Two Ukrainians - the ship's captain and the first mate - remained in Finland and were subject to a travel ban during the ongoing investigation.

"Next week ... we will want to hear more suspects or persons of interest in the case. It is possible there may be others of interest," the head of the Finnish customs anti-crime unit, Petri Lounatmaa, told AFP.

The surface-to-air missiles, produced by U.S. firm Raytheon, were discovered last week on the British-registered Thor Liberty docked in the southeastern Finnish port of Kotka and bound for the Chinese port city of Shanghai, according to Finnish police. Finnish customs are investigating the case as one of illegal export of defense material.

Lounatmaa said customs and police investigators had "been in contact with several countries" and the information gathered would help them "focus ... investigations in the right direction."

He declined to provide any details on the nature of the information received, noting only that some of it had come in the form of intelligence briefs.

More official information would be needed as evidence if the case goes to criminal proceedings, he said.

Last week, a German defense ministry spokesman said the missiles came from the German military and were destined for South Korea, not China. He said it was a "legal sale on the basis of an accord between two states at the government level" and that export authorizations were in order.

However, a senior Finnish defense ministry official said Finland had not received any transit license application for the missiles from Germany.

On Dec. 26, Finnish transport safety officials cleared the Thor Liberty to leave Finland, after the missiles and most of the cargo of 150 tons of explosives had been unloaded from the vessel.

However, the vessel remained grounded by the travel ban on its first officers.

Finland: Missile Ship Free to Depart Port

HELSINKI - Finland has removed a cargo of 69 Patriot missiles found aboard a merchant ship that docked in the country and allowed the vessel to leave, transport safety officials said Dec. 26.

Thor Liberty was detained Dec. 15 in Kotka, southeast Finland, and was later found to be carrying 150 tons of explosive material, as well as the surface-to-air Patriot missiles and missile propellant charges.

"A Trafi check on 26.12.2011 has revealed that the improperly loaded explosive material has been offloaded from the vessel, with the exception of two properly loaded containers, and the detention order has been lifted," the Finnish Transport Safety Authority Trafi said in a statement.

However Trafi noted that the ship was still unable to continue on its journey because Finnish customs had placed the Ukrainian captain and first mate under a travel ban pending an investigation into the missiles.

Trafi added that customs had also impounded the explosives still on board the ship in two containers.

The missiles, discovered Dec. 21 aboard the British-registered ship, were bound for the Chinese port city of Shanghai, according to Finnish police. Finnish customs are investigating the case as one of illegal export of defense material.

A German defense ministry spokesman said the Patriot missiles, produced by Raytheon, came from the German military and were destined for South Korea.

He said it was a "legal sale on the basis of an accord between two states at the government level." He said the transaction had received an official export authorization and was reported to customs authorities.

However Finland said Dec. 23 it had not received the paperwork required from Germany.

Russia: RS-18 Test With New Warhead Is Successful

MOSCOW - Russia on Dec. 27 successfully test fired its long-range RS-18 ballistic missile from the Baiknonur cosmodrome in Kazakhstan with a new warhead aimed at overcoming Western air defense systems, news agencies said.

A RUSSIAN RS-18 intercontinental ballistic missile launches in October 2008 from a space base in Kazakhstan. (File photo / Agence France-Presse)

The RS-18, a warhorse missile known to the West as Stilet (Stileto) that the Russian defense ministry has given a new lease of life, successfully hit its target on the Kamchatka peninsula on the Pacific, reports quoted the defense ministry as saying.

RIA Novosti news agency said that the RS-18 was carrying a new warhead aimed at overcoming missile defense systems at a time of growing tensions over plans for a U.S. missile shield in Europe.

Japan Set to Ease Arms Export Ban

TOKYO - Japanese defense minister Yasuo Ichikawa said on Dec. 24 that Tokyo plans to relax a decades-old ban on arms exports to allow Japanese firms to participate in multinational weapons development projects.

The decision, expected to be announced Dec. 27, is likely to stimulate the domestic arms industry while reducing the country's defense spending.

"We will build a new framework," Ichikawa told reporters, stressing the need for lifting the ban as the "cost of highly capable defense equipment has increased".

The self-imposed ban has been in effect since 1967, which critics say has resulted in Japan's military hardware becoming outdated, while rival China's military machine continues to grow and becomes increasingly assertive.

Japan's policy on arms exports is a subject of intense interest to foreign defense contractors, as it could pave the way for greater international cooperation on a host of weapons systems from missile defenses to fighter jets.

The ban has long been seen as an obsolete legacy of the cold war era, and Japanese political leaders have long debated whether and when to lift it.

Supporters of Japan's traditional pacifist positions have warned against such a move, while any attempts in the past by Tokyo to expand its military might have rankled regional powers like China.