SUCCESS OF US-INDIA MISSILE DEFENSE PLANEX CALLS

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 NEW DELHI 000318

SIPDIS

SIPDIS

OSD PASS TO MDA

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/16/2016
TAGS: MASS TSPL KSTC PREL MOPS IN
SUBJECT: SUCCESS OF US-INDIA MISSILE DEFENSE PLANEX CALLS
FOR WAY FORWARD


Classified By: Political Counselor Geoffrey Pyatt for Reasons 1.4 (B, D
)


1. (C) Summary: The U.S.-India Ballistic Missile Defense
(BMD) Planning Exercise (Planex) held January 11-12, 2006 in
Hyderabad sparked lively discussions on virtual threat
depictions, MD designs and operational challenges related to
ballistic MD execution. The Planex players successfully
completed four simulations that demonstrated the capabilities
of BMD in responding to regional threats. The overwhelming
success of the exercise marks the latest bilateral
interaction with India on MD, and paves the way for more
ambitious cooperation in the future, possibly to include
command-and-control and BMD acquisitions from the U.S. End
Summary


2. (C) The U.S.-India Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD)
Planning Exercise (Planex) held January 11-12, 2006 at
Research Center Imarat (RCI) in Hyderabad completed four
interactive simulations of deploying MD systems to respond to
regional threat scenarios. The GOI's Ministry of External
Affairs (MEA) Disarmament and International Security Division
(DISA) had provided in September 2005 five specific attack
scenarios that they wanted the Planex to simulate. According
to the Joint National Integration Center (JNIC) programmers,
this input represented an unprecedented level of involvement
by a partner country in developing the exercise. The attack
scenarios included details such as the types of missiles,
location of launch sites and the trajectory of incoming
threats.


3. (C) The simulations attracted an average of 20 Indian
participants at any given time, including representatives
from MEA, RCI, Defense Research Development Organization
(DRDO),the National Security Council Secretariat (NCSC),and
the Chief Integrated Defense Staff (CIDS). The simulations
depicted a "Country A" threatened by short, medium and
long-range missile systems in neighboring "Country C" and, as
a result of proliferation from Country C, "Country B."
During the simulation, a senior commander oversaw the entire
defense system, two tactical commanders supervised the north
and south, and two players in each hemisphere controlled two
defensive systems each. After two runs, the players designed
the defensive strategy themselves by prioritizing assets,
locating sensors and interceptors, and determining the
default salvo size.


4. (C) The entire program generated intense discussions on
tactical issues concerning MD systems. Led by the JNIC
moderators, the players debated whether to protect cities
before military installations, centralize or decentralize
command and control operations, and how to calculate the
ideal number of interceptors needed to neutralize a
particular threat. Dr. Saraswat, director of RCI, offered
guidance to the participants during the planning sessions,
and asked detailed questions while reviewing results. In
addition, the two MEA representatives were actively involved
throughout the program. Lively conversations also occurred
between the Indian players and the JNIC programmers, who
coached them through the initial rounds. The RCI
participants quickly displaced the Americans at the consoles,
showing a thorough understanding of the simulation software

NEW DELHI 00000318 002 OF 002


and MD stratgy. JNIC participants remarked that the Indian
participants quickly grasped all the concepts associated with
the operational challenges of planning a BMD system.


5. (C) Concluding the program, Dr. Saraswat encouraged both
sides to launch the next phase of our MD cooperation. "This
was a great learning experience for my team, and for myself
in particular," he summarized. "We need to carve out the
specifics of a roadmap ahead on technical cooperation and
other aspects of future BMD collaboration," he urged. He
also recommended adding a policy-level session. Naveen
Srivastava, Deputy Secretary in MEA/DISA, endorsed the idea
of developing a way forward, and added that "the U.S. and
India should work out a framework that allows Dr. Saraswat
and JNIC to proceed on (cooperative activities) on their
own." Such a way forward, he continued, would build on the
significant accomplishments of the completed Planex.


6. (C) Comment: The success of Planex 06 has generated
sufficient momentum that gives the U.S. the opportunity to
propose more ambitious levels of BMD cooperation with India.
Dividing MD cooperation on three parallel paths could lead to
enhanced collaboration. The first track would involve
planning for an ongoing program of exercises. An initial
planning meeting in New Delhi in April could involve some
policy makers, while a second meeting in Colorado Springs
would give the Indian side more exposure to MD simulations
and strategy. A third meeting in New Delhi in September will
finalize the terms of the exercise, which would occur in
December 2006 in New Delhi. The New Delhi locale would help
facilitate the addition of a policy component that involves
the appropriate officials.


7. (C) Comment continued: Formulating a framework that
provides for additional collaborative activities belongs on a
second track. On the margins of Planex, RCI representatives
expressed interest in contributing to joint research and
development efforts, and it appears that they have the
resources and skills to add value to projects with the U.S.
Finally, on a third path, the U.S. needs to be ready to
respond positively if the GOI pursues the acquisition of the
PAC-3 system. The enthusiasm and skills displayed during
Planex 06 requires the U.S. to craft a way forward on greater
BMD cooperation with India.


8. (U) Comment continued: Post commends the JNIC and MDA team
for a job well done.

(U) Visit New Delhi's Classified Website:
(http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/sa/newdelhi/)
MULFORD