best cruise missile in the world 2022

• Air Warfare
• Cyber (Opens in new window)
• C4ISR (Opens in new window)
• Training & Sim
• Asia Pacific
• Mideast Africa
• The Americas
• Top 100 Companies
• Defense News Weekly
• Money Minute
• Whitepapers & eBooks (Opens in new window)
• DSDs & SMRs (Opens in new window)
• Webcasts (Opens in new window)
• Events (Opens in new window)
• Newsletters (Opens in new window)
• Events Calendar
• Early Bird Brief
• Digital Edition (Opens in new window)

Moskva’s sinking, the rise of anti-ship cruise missiles and what that means for the US Navy

On April 14, Ukraine once again shocked the world when it launched two Neptune anti-ship cruise missiles, scoring decisive hits that sunk the Russian Black Sea Fleet flagship Moskva . Named for the Russian capital Moscow, this once-symbol of Russian naval supremacy in the war on Ukraine carried a crew of roughly 500 and was fully equipped with an arsenal of anti-ship, anti-aircraft and air defense missiles. Despite its foreboding appearance, this pride of the Russian Federation was unable to defend itself against a small number ASCMs, and it paid the ultimate price.

The fallout from the Moskva sinking has been many faceted. First and foremost, it was a strategic success for Ukraine — taking Russia’s most lethal warship out of the war and forcing the remaining fleet to retreat farther away from the coast. Second, the sinking is an inescapable political problem for Russian President Vladimir Putin. His misinformation campaign within Russia, unable to suppress the news of this casualty, now must answer for this destroyed vessel and the well-being of its crew.

There is another message from this catastrophe, however, that both the U.S. Navy and Congress must consider when faced with making long-term spending decisions for our 21st century fleet: If a relatively low-cost, short-range missile such as Neptune can destroy one of the largest warships in the Russian Navy, how do we ensure that ships in our fleet are not doomed to the same fate?

This question becomes even more serious when considering the sophistication of China’s anti-ship missile technology , which significantly dwarfs the range and firepower of Ukraine’s Neptune missile. By way of comparison, the Neptune has a range of roughly 200 miles, travels at subsonic speed and has a warhead that is designed to cripple but not necessarily sink a large ship. China has anti-ship missiles like the Dong Feng 21, or DF21 — whose range is roughly 1,000 miles — and the DF26, whose range is roughly 2,500 miles.

If Ukraine’s Neptune ASCMs upended Russia’s naval presence in the Black Sea with ease, clearly the U.S. Navy and Congress must consider whether our pacing threat is capable of the same.

The U.S. Navy has been furiously working on countermeasures, such as longer-range radars and integrated air and missile defense systems, both of which are being incorporated into new ship construction. The Navy also expressed confidence in the contribution of our submarine fleet with a higher budget for submarine construction and plans to extend the life of older Los Angeles-class subs.

These vessels are relatively impervious to the ASCM threat; our surface fleet is not. Today’s surface fleet must be capable to detect, track and engage our adversaries’ most capable anti-ship missiles, and have the structural integrity to survive damage sustained in combat.

President Joe Biden’s proposed Navy budget reflects the need to think through this strategic challenge. On the one hand, the request of $28 billion for Navy shipbuilding is the largest ever. By way of comparison, then-President Donald Trump’s last budget in 2020 requested $19 billion. But Biden’s request also seeks to decommission a number of legacy surface ships that predate the threat posed by modern anti-ship missiles. Predictably, this decision has been greeted by a chorus of protest, but nonetheless the fact remains: Every U.S. ship that sails into harm’s way must represent a relevant threat and be fit to fight.

Among the contested ships proposed for decommissioning are five Ticonderoga-class cruisers. The Navy, in its annual shipbuilding report to Congress , cited several serious concerns with the Ticonderoga-class cruiser, including “poor material condition of these ships due to their age” and “ongoing concerns with overall legacy sensor and [hull, mechanical and electrical] system reliability.” The chief of naval operations, Adm. Mike Gilday, said that the cruiser’s “SPY-1A, SP-1B [radars are] just not sufficient given the threat we’re facing.” By comparison, the oldest Ticonderoga-class cruiser proposed for decommissioning was commissioned in 1986, only four years after the Russian Slava-class cruiser Moskva.

While it is unclear whether the combat system aboard the Moskva failed her crew, it is without doubt its age and seaworthiness played a role in its demise as the crew was overcome by fire, smoke and seawater.

One lesson that the courageous nation of Ukraine has demonstrated to the world is one that Congress should heed: We not only need to invest in a strong Navy, but also in a survivable one. As Congress begins to shape the fiscal 2023 National Defense Authorization Act, we must take an honest look at whether the platforms we are fielding to engage our adversaries are both relevant and survivable in modern naval warfare.

Rep. Joe Courtney, D-Conn., serves on the House Armed Services Committee and chairs its Seapower and Projection Forces Subcommittee. He founded and co-chairs the Friends of Australia Caucus as well as the AUKUS Working Group (otherwise known as the AUKUS Caucus).

More In Commentary

Air Force, Space Force unveil tool for AI experimentation

The services want to use the tool to better understand how ai could improve access to information and to gauge whether there’s demand within the force..

House bill funds new tranche of Philippines, Taiwan military aid

The house's fy25 state department funding bill shows that the u.s. has a continued interest in keeping china at bay in the indo-pacific..

Firefly inks deal with Lockheed to launch up to 25 missions

The agreement, announced june 5, commits lockheed to 15 launch reservations and up to 10 optional missions..

House lawmakers propose $1.3 billion for Pentagon innovation

The bill would add more than $500 million for diu initiatives to quickly deliver capabilities to combatant commands and the military services..

Space Force eyes advanced tech, new orbits for narrowband SATCOM

The service may launch a "transitional" capability to meo by 2031 if those satellites can work with existing terminals without needing major modifications., featured video, "young men don't lose brothers well." vietnam recon veterans recall those who didn't come home.

What Type of Savings Accounts Are Out There? — Money Minute

Real world conflicts inform military leaders on the future of electronic warfare

The future of electronic warfare and cyber threats | Defense News Weekly Full Episode 6.8.24

Trending now, air national guard gets service’s first combat-ready f-15ex, italian navy starts doling out money for sub-sea drone technologies, australia fast-tracks its hunt for replacement frigates, knds will set up shop in ukraine to repair heavy weapons, make ammo.

Programs submenu

Regions submenu, topics submenu, mda and the 2025 budget, centering human rights in ukraine's reconstruction, african youth: leveraging creativity for change, u.s.-rok bilateral dialogue for strengthening u.s.-rok alliance.

• Abshire-Inamori Leadership Academy
• Aerospace Security Project
• Africa Program
• Americas Program
• Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy
• Asia Maritime Transparency Initiative
• Asia Program
• Australia Chair
• Brzezinski Chair in Global Security and Geostrategy
• Brzezinski Institute on Geostrategy
• Chair in U.S.-India Policy Studies
• China Power Project
• Chinese Business and Economics
• Defending Democratic Institutions
• Defense-Industrial Initiatives Group
• Defense 360
• Defense Budget Analysis
• Diversity and Leadership in International Affairs Project
• Economics Program
• Emeritus Chair in Strategy
• Energy Security and Climate Change Program
• Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program
• Freeman Chair in China Studies
• Futures Lab
• Geoeconomic Council of Advisers
• Global Food and Water Security Program
• Global Health Policy Center
• Hess Center for New Frontiers
• Human Rights Initiative
• Humanitarian Agenda
• Intelligence, National Security, and Technology Program
• International Security Program
• Japan Chair
• Kissinger Chair
• Korea Chair
• Langone Chair in American Leadership
• Middle East Program
• Missile Defense Project
• Project on Critical Minerals Security
• Project on Fragility and Mobility
• Project on Nuclear Issues
• Project on Prosperity and Development
• Project on Trade and Technology
• Renewing American Innovation Project
• Scholl Chair in International Business
• Smart Women, Smart Power
• Southeast Asia Program
• Stephenson Ocean Security Project
• Strategic Technologies Program
• Transnational Threats Project
• Wadhwani Center for AI and Advanced Technologies
• All Regions
• Australia, New Zealand & Pacific
• Middle East
• Russia and Eurasia
• American Innovation
• Civic Education
• Climate Change
• Cybersecurity
• Defense Budget and Acquisition
• Defense and Security
• Energy and Sustainability
• Food Security
• Gender and International Security
• Geopolitics
• Global Health
• Human Rights
• Humanitarian Assistance
• Intelligence
• International Development
• Maritime Issues and Oceans
• Missile Defense
• Nuclear Issues
• Transnational Threats
• Water Security

The 2022 Missile Defense Review: Still Seeking Alignment

Commentary by Tom Karako

Published October 27, 2022

The Biden administration released its unclassified Missile Defense Review today, as part of the National Defense Strategy. As policy guidance to an increasingly broad enterprise, the 2022 MDR represents an opportunity to achieve greater alignment between U.S. air and missile defense (AMD) efforts and the strategic competition with China and Russia.

The new MDR is a step forward from past reviews in several respects. Gone is the primary focus on rogue state ballistic missiles that defined the 2010 review. It also corrects the 2019 MDR’s insufficient attention to integration, air defense layering for cruise missile and UAS threats, and survivability. Although the public version of the review leaves much to be desired, it nevertheless advances several critical mission areas: a comprehensive approach to missile defeat, homeland cruise missile defense, the defense of Guam, and distributed operations.

This MDR has three parts: the first addresses the evolving air and missile threat environment, the second, the U.S. strategy and policy framework, and the third, ways to strengthen international cooperation. Following the overarching theme of the 2022 NDS, the MDR describes missile defenses as a critical component of “integrated deterrence,” defined as a framework bringing together all instruments of national power.

The 12-page, 4,700-word document is dramatically shorter than the 2019 version, which came in at 28,834 words and 100 pages. While brevity can bring readability and concision, it can do so at the expense of what is unsaid and of questions left open.

Despite the National Defense Strategy’s emphasis on this as the “decisive decade,” the MDR does not specify dates or timelines, and budget documents suggest that key new capabilities appear to be pushed to the 2030s. Other notable absences include the usual reference to arms control limitations, the need for increasing production quantities, the need for maintaining flexible acquisition authorities, and specifics on who exactly will manage this new “missile defeat” enterprise.

Weapons of Choice

One of the strengths of the 2019 MDR was its broader description of missile threats, to include ballistic, cruise, and hypersonic missiles. The Trump administration’s actual programmatic and budgetary implementation of hypersonic and cruise missile defense, however, were quite modest. The 2019 review also neglected UAS as a species of air defense, or what the new review calls “missile-related” threats. As seen in the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, Iranian attacks in 2019 , and the Ukrainian war this year, that neglect is no longer tenable.

The 2022 review draws attention to the more complete spectrum of air and missile threats. It describes UAS as an “inexpensive, flexible, and plausibly deniable” means to “carry out tactical-level attacks below the threshold for major response, making them an increasingly preferred capability.” Still, other delivery systems must also be contemplated going forward, including spaceplanes and fractional or multiple orbital delivery systems “that move in and out of the atmosphere.”

The threat description in the MDR is, however, less sharply put than that conveyed by the May 2022 congressional testimony of Assistant Secretary of Defense John Plumb: “Offensive missiles are increasingly weapons of choice for Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran, for use in conflict and to coerce and intimidate their neighbors.”

Strategic Deterrence and Defense

Like the Obama and Trump administration reviews, the Biden MDR notes that "the United States will continue to rely on strategic deterrence . . . to address and deter large intercontinental-range, nuclear missile threats to the homeland.” While this distinction may apply specifically to Chinese and Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles, it need not apply to other delivery systems, to non-nuclear strategic attack, or to the likes of North Korea.

Even as threats increase, the new MDR states “the United States will also continue to stay ahead of North Korean missile threats to the homeland through a comprehensive missile defeat approach, complemented by the credible threat of direct cost imposition through nuclear and non-nuclear means.” The use of “missile defeat” represents a subtle but important shift which applies broadly to the missile defense enterprise. A broad defense and defeat-dominant posture toward North Korea remains intact, but attack operations and more novel measures left of launch will help size the requirements for active missile defense interceptors within the comprehensive missile defeat enterprise.

Homeland ballistic missile defense is here to stay. The Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system is “an essential element” of missile defeat, and its “continued modernization and expansion” is necessary to maintain both “a visible measure of protection for the U.S. population” and an assurance to “allies and partners that the United States will not be coerced by threats to the homeland.” The Biden administration initiated a competitive development process to procure 20 Next Generation Interceptors (NGIs) in March 2021. The MDR notes that the NGI may not merely “augment” but “potentially replace” today’s fleet of 44 Ground Based Interceptors.

Air Defenses

The 2022 MDR corrects past inattention to aerial threats, including unmanned aerial systems (UAS) and homeland cruise missile defense. The review says that “homeland and regionally forward deployed forces require the fielding of technical and integrated C-UAS solutions.” While not discussed in the review, the U.S. Army is moving out rapidly as the acquisition authority for countering UAS (C-UAS). Possible capability improvements are legion, but capacity and training for the mission remain paramount. The new MDR likewise embraces cruise missile defense for the homeland (CMD-H), which first appeared in the 2022 and 2023 budget requests. The past focus on rogue state ballistic missile attacks should give way to a focus on a nonnuclear strategic attack by major powers: “To deter attempts by adversaries to stay under the nuclear threshold and achieve strategic results with conventional capabilities, the United States will examine active and passive defense measures to decrease the risk from any cruise missile strike against critical assets, regardless of origin.”

The discussion of future technologies prioritizes sensors above all, followed by battle management and command and control (C2). The missions for AMD sensors are to “detect, characterize, track, and engage current and emerging advanced air and missile threats regionally, and to improve early warning, identification, tracking, discrimination, and attribution for missile threats to the homeland.” Requiring engagement support for regional threats but not for attacks on the homeland seems especially odd since the document repeatedly highlights the specter of nonnuclear strategic attack on the homeland. CMD-H must also include engagement capabilities; its sensors must include those capable of combat identification and fire control quality tracks. That paragraph highlights modern over-the-horizon radars for “improving warning and tracking against cruise missile and other threats to the homeland.” The same criterion must be applied to the emerging space sensors. It is not good enough to provide “strategic and theater missile warning and tracking.” Sensor architectures must also support fire control.

The 2019 review referenced “transregional” threats, which blur the legacy distinction between homeland and regional concerns. As it turns out, cruise missiles, UAS, and aerial threats that threaten U.S. forces and allies in other regions are a global concern. North America is a region, too, and cruise missile defense for the homeland is a capability the United States has neglected for too long. Embracing the priority of homeland missile defense requires attention to more than just rogue state ballistic missiles. It remains to be seen whether the Air Force moves out to field not just sensors but active defenses for CMD-H.

Complex and Integrated Attacks

The new MDR notably recognizes how various air and missile threats would be used in conjunction for complex and integrated attacks. The text places special attention to UAS: “Adversaries also are utilizing multiple types of missile salvos—such as one-way attack UAS in combination with rockets—in an effort to defeat missile defense systems.” America’s perceived birthright to air superiority is long gone. Recognition in a policy document of how adversary air and missile threats could suppress and disintegrate active defenses is long overdue. Its implications are profound.

It is critical to acknowledge that adversaries will attempt to suppress U.S. and allied AMD capabilities. The 2018 NDS endorsed dispersed basing and operations, but the 2019 MDR did not apply that logic to AMD. The 2022 review does so explicitly: “Future air and missile defense capabilities must also be more mobile, flexible, survivable, and affordable, and emphasize disaggregation, dispersal, and maneuver to mitigate the threat from adversary missiles.”

AMD is necessary not only for fixed infrastructure, but for “joint maneuver forces.” It is all well and good to move swiftly around the battlefield, but loitering munitions and cruise missile targeting has dramatically improved. Mobility is no longer a panacea. With limited room to move on a small island like Guam—where launchers have little place to be repositioned—it may not be worth the time and expense to require AMD elements to be fully mobile. When one must defend what one cannot move or hide, fixed emplacements may be good enough.

The defense of Guam is, indeed, one of the most important new initiatives of the Biden administration. Despite years of urging by U.S. Indo-Pacific Command, the matter only first appeared in the 2022 and 2023 budget requests. As with CMD-H, the problem of Guam further defies the homeland-regional dichotomy of yesteryear. Guam has a “unique status as both an unequivocal part of the United States as well as a vital regional location.” The significance of Guam as a test case for full-spectrum, 360-degree AMD cannot be overstated.

International Cooperation

Three of the MDR’s 12 pages are devoted to describing international missile defense cooperation. Its discussion of cooperation with Canada is accompanied by reference to the “acute” (read: Russian) threat of “increasingly sophisticated conventional missile capabilities that are able to target critical infrastructure in North America.” Again, the document commits to improving “early warning surveillance for potential incursions or attacks,” but does not discuss the need for fire-control quality tracking and engagement support.

In the Indo-Pacific, the MDR highlights cooperation with Japan, Australia, and South Korea. Within NATO, the Patriot, NASAMS, and the SAMP-T systems get shoutouts in the endorsement of 360-degree AMD (read: to include Russia). The European Sky Shield Initiative may be an important element of this, although C2 and sensors for NATO probably deserve prioritization. Recent developments in Europe include Germany’s consideration of Arrow-3, Poland’s defense buildup across the board, and Finland and Sweden’s likely accession to NATO. Slovakia, moreover, likely needs new defenses to replace the S-300 units it donated to Ukraine. The document recognizes the longstanding cooperative efforts with Israel, encourages Gulf Cooperation Council cooperation, and notes the “ongoing normalization efforts between Israel and key Arab states” to create new opportunities for AMD cooperation.

The global market for AMD capabilities has continued to increase. The MDR notes how Russia uses “several lower-tier air defense systems for its own use and export as a foreign policy instrument.” The sale of the S-400 to countries like Turkey and India, for instance, has certainly been a wedge within the alliances. How well Russia is able to maintain the operation and upgrades of those exports in the face of sanctions on its defense industry will remain to be seen.

Honorable Unmentions

The brevity of the 2022 review means that it leaves several issues unmentioned. One notable absence is timelines and phases. It is one thing to say that the United States must defend Guam, that it must have hypersonic defense, and that space sensors are critical, but there are no express milestones or dates to assess whether they will be available within the decade, let alone at the speed of relevance.

Also missing are the usual recitations about arms control. The 2010 review declared that “the Administration will continue to reject any negotiated restraints on U.S. ballistic missile defenses,” and the 2019 review affirmed that “the United States will not accept any limitation or constraint on the development or deployment of missile defense capabilities needed to protect the homeland against rogue missile threats.” Instead, with language reminiscent of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty’s preamble, the document highlights “the interrelationship between strategic offensive arms and strategic defensive systems.” Without endorsing limitations, the 2022 MDR suggests “strengthening mutual transparency and predictability.”

Another omission is any reference to acquisition authorities, the protection of which was affirmed in both the 2010 and 2019 reviews and in numerous legislative pronouncements. This may reflect the legacy of what is known as the “Trump DTM,” the Directive Type Memorandum . Even when the Pentagon was pushing acquisition authorities down across the services, the Trump administration began to undermine the acquisition authorities of the Missile Defense Agency. The 2022 MDR does, however, acknowledge the need for “adaptive acquisition approaches.” Rescinding the Trump DTM would help protect such approaches.

The document omits past discussions on directed-energy missile defense systems. Given the intensity of the air and missile threat spectrum, non-kinetic effects offer considerable promise. The Trump administration removed directed energy from the Missile Defense Agency’s budget. As technology has advanced in service and DOD-wide applications, concepts like high-powered microwaves, short-pulse lasers, and other types might now have applications for active defense missions.

The MDR’s policy direction does not seem to address who will manage the department’s missile defeat enterprise. While embracing of the full means of countering and defeating missile threats has much to commend it, an unbalanced pivot to “missile defeat” carries could have pitfalls. A prudent “fly before you buy” approach should apply to exotic non-kinetic and left-of-launch capabilities just as it does to hit-to-kill interceptors. Reliance on highly secret solutions that sacrifices deterrence for warfighting may be necessary, but nonkinetic and left-of-launch capabilities could be unproven, untestable, incapable of demonstration, and unsusceptible to foreign military sales.

A final unmentioned item worthy of policy guidance relates to production. One of the many lessons of the Ukraine conflict is how quickly missiles and munitions are expended in a conflict with a major power. The necessity of mass-producing AMD elements must be addressed. European countries who have given their air defenses to Ukraine, for instance, will no doubt be expecting a backfill. NATO’s air defense initiatives signal a demand for significant procurement and the potential for collaborative and bulk approaches.

As Assistant Secretary Plumb said in May , “Missiles have become a common and expected facet of modern warfare,” which makes “missile defeat and missile defense efforts more important than ever.” If the Trump MDR foundered for disconnects from budgets and programs, the Biden MDR deserves similar scrutiny so that these capabilities do not remain paper programs . While advancing certain mission areas on paper, taking the next steps requires implementing CMD-H, the defense of Guam, space sensors, and hypersonic defense with the seriousness they demand. The missile threat spectrum is not a boutique problem, but a central military challenge from China and Russia. Whether the Biden administration will properly resource and implement the goals of its MDR and NDS is now the question.

Tom Karako is a senior fellow with the International Security Program and the director of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, D.C.

Commentary   is produced by the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), a private, tax-exempt institution focusing on international public policy issues. Its research is nonpartisan and nonproprietary. CSIS does not take specific policy positions. Accordingly, all views, positions, and conclusions expressed in this publication should be understood to be solely those of the author(s).

© 2022 by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. All rights reserved.

Programs & Projects

North Korea Says It Practiced Firing Nuclear-Capable Cruise Missiles

FILE PHOTO: North Korea's leader Kim Jong Un addresses the Supreme People's Assembly, North Korea's parliament, which passed a law officially enshrining its nuclear weapons policies, in Pyongyang, North Korea, September 8, 2022 in this photo released by North Korea's Korean Central News Agency (KCNA). KCNA via REUTERS/File Photo

By Josh Smith and Joori Roh

SEOUL (Reuters) - North Korean leader Kim Jong Un oversaw the launch of two long-range strategic cruise missiles, state media reported on Thursday, calling it a test to confirm the reliability and operation of nuclear-capable weapons deployed to military units.

The test firing was conducted on Wednesday, and was aimed at "enhancing the combat efficiency and might" of cruise missiles deployed to the Korean People's Army "for the operation of tactical nukes," state media Korea Central News Agency (KCNA) said.

Stressing that the test launch was another clear warning to its "enemies," leader Kim Jong Un said the country "should continue to expand the operational sphere of the nuclear strategic armed forces to resolutely deter any crucial military crisis and war crisis at any time and completely take the initiative in it," according to KCNA.

On Monday, KCNA said Kim had guided nuclear tactical exercises targeting South Korea over the past two weeks in protest of recent joint naval drills by South Korean and U.S. forces involving an aircraft carrier.

KCNA reported that the two missiles test-fired on Wednesday flew for 10,234 seconds and "clearly hit the target 2,000 km (1,240 miles) away."

A U.S. State Department spokesperson declined to comment on the launches, and said Washington remained focused on coordinating closely with its allies and partners to address the threats posed by North Korea.

South Korean President Yoon Suk-yeol's office said the North's cruise missiles do not pose a threat as they are "slow enough to be intercepted," but Seoul is ready to sternly respond to Pyongyang's provocations with "overwhelming forces."

The South's military also said it had monitored the launch in real time and was continuing to analyse data from the tests.

North Korea first tested a "strategic" cruise missile in September 2021, which was seen by analysts at the time as possibly the country's first such weapon with a nuclear capability.

Wednesday's test confirms that nuclear role and that it is operational, although it is unclear whether North Korea can build warheads small enough for a cruise missile.

The cruise missiles are among a number of smaller weapons recently developed by North Korea to fly low and maneuver so as to better evade missile defences.

Kim said last year that developing smaller warheads was a top goal, and officials in Seoul have said that if the North resumes nuclear testing for the first time since 2017, developing smaller devices could be among its aims.

North Korea's cruise missiles usually generate less interest than ballistic missiles because they are not explicitly banned under U.N. Nations Security Council resolutions.

Cruise missiles and short-range ballistic missiles that can be armed with either conventional or nuclear warheads are particularly destabilising in the event of conflict as it can be unclear which kind of warhead they are carrying, analysts said.

"North Korea’s cruise missiles, air force, and tactical nuclear devices are probably much less capable than propaganda suggests," Leif-Eric Easley, a professor at Ewha University in Seoul. "But it would be a mistake to dismiss North Korea’s recent weapons testing spree as bluster or saber-rattling."

U.S. President Joe Biden's administration rolled out a long-delayed national security strategy on Wednesday with only a lone reference to North Korea, underscoring limited U.S. options to contain its nuclear and missile programs.

Daniel Russel, the top U.S. diplomat for East Asia under former President Barack Obama, said this was striking, "not only because it passes so quickly past a persistent and existential threat, but also because it frames the strategy as 'seeking sustained diplomacy toward denuclearization,' when North Korea has so convincingly demonstrated its utter rejection of negotiations."

A report by the U.S.-based Center for Strategic and International Studies said on Wednesday that a recent underwater launch of a ballistic missile from a lake probably has more political than military usefulness.

"Rather than an emerging threat, this test was most likely a propaganda and deception operation designed to focus regional and world attention on North Korea’s desired external image of a mighty and powerful nuclear-armed nation," the report said.

The North's pursuit of new types of nuclear weapons has renewed calls by some in South Korea to redeploy American tactical nuclear weapons, which were withdrawn in 1991, or for Seoul to leave the Non-Proliferation Treaty and develop its own arsenal.

After backing the idea of asking the United States to redeploy nuclear weapons during the election campaign last year, Yoon has since said that option has been ruled out.

Senior members of this party, however, this week said it was time to reconsider.

(Reporting by Joori Roh and Josh Smith; Additional reporting by David Brunnstrom in Washington and Hyonhee Shin in Seoul; Editing by Richard Pullin and Gerry Doyle)

Copyright 2022 Thomson Reuters .

Join the Conversation

Tags: South Korea , North Korea

America 2024

Healthiest Communities

Your trusted source for in-depth analysis on the issues impacting your community’s well-being delivered right to your inbox.

Sign in to manage your newsletters »

Sign up to receive the latest updates from U.S News & World Report and our trusted partners and sponsors. By clicking submit, you are agreeing to our Terms and Conditions & Privacy Policy .

You May Also Like

The 10 worst presidents.

U.S. News Staff Feb. 23, 2024

The Best Cartoons on Donald Trump

June 11, 2024, at 12:31 p.m.

Joe Biden Behind The Scenes

June 7, 2024

Son’s Verdict Gives Biden an Opportunity

Laura Mannweiler June 11, 2024

Is a Hamas-Israel Cease-Fire Near?

Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder June 11, 2024

What Is Contempt of Congress?

Aneeta Mathur-Ashton June 11, 2024

The Week in Cartoons June 10-14

World Bank Ups Global Economic Forecast

Tim Smart June 11, 2024

Biden Talks Guns in Contrast With Trump

Lauren Camera June 11, 2024

CEOs Change Their Tune on Trump

Top 10 Cruise Missiles in the World

Here is the list of Top 10 Cruise Missiles in the World , Cruise missiles are designed to deliver a large warhead over long distances with high precision. Today’s cruise missiles are even capable of traveling at supersonic or high subsonic speeds, are self-navigating, and can fly on a un ballistic extremely low altitude trajectory. Out of all the cruise missiles in the world today, we’ve chosen the ten best, and this list is based primarily on the quality performance guidance systems types of warhead and many other factors.

List of Top 10 Cruise Missiles in the World

10. rgm 84 harpoon block ii ( best cruise missile in the world ).

This is a ship-launched all-weather over-the-horizon anti-ship missile with a low-level seized gaming cruise trajectory, active radar guidance, and a warhead design that ensures great survivability and effectiveness against land and ship-stationed targets.

In port, the missile uses GPS-aided inertial navigation, and the 500-pound penetration high explosive burst payload offers considerable firepower to destroy coastal defense and surface-to-air missile positions, as well as aircraft ports and industrial installations.

9. RBS-15 MK III ( Best cruise missile in the world )

It is a long-range surface-to-surface and air-to-surface anti-ship missile that can also attack land targets. The rbs 15 guidance and control systems include an inertial navigation system and a GPS receiver as well as a radar altimeter and the Ku band radar target seeker.

The missile can be equipped with an optimized heavy high explosive blast fragmentation warhead and this resistance to enemy countermeasures the speed and range of these missiles are over Mach 0.9 and 250 kilometers standoff missile is Turkey’s first indigenous long-range autonomous high precision air-to-surface cruise missiles

8. STANDOFF MISSILE ( SOM ) ( Best cruise missile in the world )

For high precision guiding, it is outfitted with an imaging infrared seeker and an inertial measurement unit. The missile has a high rate of success against moving land and surface targets. stationary targets of high-value Strategic assets provide cover for exposed aircraft.

aircraft hangars, command and control centers, and sea surface threats. The SOM has a maximum speed of Mach 0.94 and a range of 180 kilometers. It can operate in all weather conditions as well as hostile environments.

7. NAVAL STRIKE MISSILE ( NSM ) ( Best cruise missile in the world )

This is a land-attack and anti-ship missile developed by the Norwegian firm Kongsberg Defense and aerospace The missile is constructed of materials designed to provide superior stealth capabilities.

The NSM’s stealth design allows the anti-ship missile to penetrate shipboard defenses. The missile detects and discriminates the targets using GPS-aided mid-course guidance and a dual-band imaging infrared seeker. The missile will weigh little more than 400 kilograms, travel at a speed of Mach 0.7 to 0.9, and have a range of kilometers or more.

6. AGM-86B ALCM ( Best cruise missile in the world )

This is a Boeing-built subsonic air launch cruise missile operated by the United States Air Force. This missile was created to improve the effectiveness and survivability of the Boeing B-52H. Strategic bomber Stratofortress During the flight, it is directed by a lightweight inertial navigation system element with ter-com updates.

This technology compares surface characteristics to maps of planned flight routes recorded in onboard computers to establish the missile’s location. As the missile gets closer to its target, the comparisons get increasingly exact, guiding the missile to target with pinpoint accuracy. Traditionally, the AGM-86b ALCMtransports a 200 kiloton w81 nuclear weapon for a distance of approximately 2 500 kilometers. It is 6.32 meters in length and weighs 1458 kilos.

5. STORM SHADOW ( Best cruise missile in the world )

This is a long-range air-launched stand-off assault missile created and developed by MBTA systems in France. The missile has fire-and-forget technology and is designed to target high-value stationary assets such as air bases, radar stations, communication hubs, and port facilities.

The missile’s navigation technology integrates GPS inertial navigation and terrain reference navigation for enhanced control over the course and accurate target strike. The storm shadow can engage targets precisely in any weather conditions, day or night, and can penetrate deep through hard rock targets.

4. TOMAHAWK BLOCK IV ( Best cruise missile in the world )

This is a long-range, all-weather jet-powered cruise missile employed primarily by the US Navy and the Royal Navy in the ship and submarine-based land strike operations. The Tomahawk Block 4 follows a predetermined trajectory using GPS navigation and a satellite data link.

The missile can be armed with a nuclear or unitary warhead or a conventional submunitions dispenser containing combined effect bomblets, and it can strike high-value or heavily protected land targets.

3. P-800 ONIKS ( Best cruise missile in the world )

This is a Russian supersonic anti-ship cruise missile developed by NPO machine Australia as a ramjet version of the p80 zuber it is guided with mid-course inertial guidance active radar homing passive radar seeker head the p800 has two ways it can approach its target it can fly just above the sea the entire way which reduces its range to 120 kilometers but increases its accuracy

It can either fly high at first and then drop towards the target, giving the p800 a maximum range of 300 kilometers. According to some reports, the p800 has a range of 600 kilometers. Its top speed is Mach 2.5, which may be too fast for close-range weapon systems.

2. 3M54 KALIBR ( Best cruise missile in the world )

This is a class of Russian surface ships, submarine launchers, aerial anti-ship and coastal anti-ship land-attack cruise missiles, and anti-submarine missiles designed by the Novator design bureau. It is guided by inertial guidance, terminal active radar homing, and Turcom DSM-ac.

This missile is a five-version modular system. two types of anti-shipping weapons, one for land attack and two anti-submarine weapons In contrast to the conventional linear flight path of other anti-ship cruise missiles, the three m54 caliber missiles are capable of making very high angle defensive high-speed maneuvers.

1. BRAHMOS ( fastest cruise missile in the world )

Brahmos is a supersonic cruise missile being developed by an Indian-Russian joint venture. The ship and land-based Brahmos missiles can carry a conventional semi-armor-piercing warhead of 200 kilograms, while the aerial variant can carry a 300-kilogram warhead. It is guided with active radar homing GPS global orbiting navigational satellite system and GPS aided geo augmented navigation satellite guidance.

These missiles can intercept surface targets as low as 10 meters in altitude. Brahmos has a top speed of Mach 3, making them the world’s fastest anti-ship cruise missile in use. When completely built, the hypersonic version of the Brahmos missile will be the fastest hypersonic missile in the world, capable of traveling at speeds ranging from Mach 5 to Mach 7.

Top 10 Solar Cars in the world

Top 10 Best Camper in the World

Top 10 American Pickup Truck 2022

• Print and Download (PDF)

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

• My View My View
• Following Following
• Saved Saved

North Korea says it practiced firing nuclear-capable cruise missiles

• Medium Text

Sign up here.

Reporting by Joori Roh and Josh Smith; Additional reporting by David Brunnstrom in Washington and Hyonhee Shin in Seoul; Editing by Richard Pullin and Gerry Doyle

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles. New Tab , opens new tab

World Chevron

Hong kong uses new national security law against exiled activists.

Hong Kong's Security Bureau said on Wednesday it would use powers in a new national security against six self-exiled activists residing in Britain, including cancelling their passports, after they fled the China-ruled city.

North Korea says it tested ‘super-large’ cruise missile warhead and new anti-aircraft missile

SEOUL, South Korea — North Korea said Saturday it tested a “super-large” cruise missile warhead and a new anti-aircraft missile in a western coastal area as it expands military capabilities in the face of deepening tensions with the United States and South Korea.

North Korean state media said the country’s missile administration on Friday conducted a “power test” for the warhead designed for the Hwasal-1 Ra-3 strategic cruise missile and a test-launch of the Pyoljji-1-2 anti-aircraft missile. It said the tests attained an unspecified “certain goal.”

Photos released by the North’s official Korean Central News Agency showed at least two missiles being fired off launcher trucks at a runway.

North Korea conducted a similar set of tests Feb. 2, but at the time did not specify the names of the cruise missile or the anti-aircraft missile, indicating it was possibly seeing technological progress after testing the same system over weeks.

KCNA insisted Friday’s tests were part of the North’s regular military development activities and had nothing to do with the “surrounding situation.”

Tensions on the Korean Peninsula are at their highest in years, with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un dialing up his weapons demonstrations, which have included more powerful missiles aimed at the U.S. mainland and U.S. targets in the Pacific. The United States, South Korea and Japan have responded by expanding their combined military training and sharpening their deterrence strategies built around strategic U.S. assets.

Cruise missiles are among a  growing collection of North Korean weapons  designed to overwhelm regional missile defenses. They supplement the North’s vast lineup of ballistic missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missiles aimed at the continental United States.

Analysts say anti-aircraft missile technology is an area where North Korea could benefit from its  deepening military cooperation with Russia , as the two countries align in the face of their separate, intensifying confrontations with the U.S. The United States and South Korea have accused North Korea of providing artillery shells and other equipment to Russia to help extend its warfighting in Ukraine.

The Associated Press

• International edition
• Australia edition
• Europe edition

North Korea says it has test-fired long-range cruise missile

US says weapon, claimed to have flown 1,500km, poses ‘threats’ to country’s neighbours and beyond

North Korea has carried out successful tests of a new long-range cruise missile over the weekend, its state media outlet KCNA said, sparking fresh criticism from the US amid a protracted standoff over denuclearisation.

The missiles are “a strategic weapon of great significance” and flew 1,500km (930 miles) before hitting their targets and falling into the country’s territorial waters during the tests on Saturday and Sunday, KCNA said. The missiles travelled for 126 minutes along “oval and pattern-8 flight orbits”, it reported.

The latest development came just days after a military parade was held in the capital, Pyongyang, to mark the 73rd anniversary of the country’s founding. In the past year, there have also been speculation outside the country over to what extent Covid-19 has affected its economy and the health of its population of nearly 26 million.

The United States military said Pyongyang’s latest missile tests posed “threats” to the country’s neighbours and beyond. “This activity highlights [North Korea’s] continuing focus on developing its military program and the threats that poses to its neighbours and the international community,” the US Indo-Pacific command said in a statement.

North Korea’s neighbour Japan said it had “significant concerns” about the latest development. The chief cabinet secretary, Katsunobu Kato, said Tokyo would continue to work closely with the US and South Korea to monitor the situation.

Pictures in North Korea’s Rodong Sinmun newspaper showed a missile exiting one of five tubes on a launch vehicle in a ball of flame, and a missile in horizontal flight.

Such a weapon would represent a marked advance in North Korea’s weapons technology, analysts said, better able to avoid defence systems to deliver a warhead across the South Korea or Japan – both US allies.

“This would be the first cruise missile in North Korea to be explicitly designated a ‘strategic’ role,” Ankit Panda, a senior fellow at the US-based Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, told Reuters. “This is a common euphemism for nuclear-capable system.”

Analysts say it is unclear whether North Korea has mastered the technology needed to build warheads small enough to be carried on a cruise missile, but the country’s leader, Kim Jong-un, said earlier this year that developing smaller bombs was a top goal.

Kim did not appear to have attended the test. KCNA said Pak Jong-chon, a member of the Workers’ party’s powerful politburo and a secretary of its central committee, oversaw it.

The reported launches are the first since March by North Korea . The regime also conducted a cruise missile test just hours after the US president, Joe Biden, took office in January.

North Korea’s cruise missiles usually generate less interest than ballistic missiles because they are not explicitly banned under UN security council resolutions.

A ballistic missile is one that has a ballistic trajectory over most of its flight path, whereas a cruise missile is self-propelled for the most part of its flight, and it flies at lower altitudes and in a relatively straight line.

“North Korea is exploring new ways to add more bargaining chips on the negotiation table, but such a provocation will almost certainly dominate the current round of trilateral dialogue among the US, Japan and South Korea,” said Prof Ramon Pacheco Pardo of Kings College London.

The unveiling of the test came just a day before chief nuclear negotiators from the United States, South Korea and Japan meet in Tokyo to explore ways to break the diplomatic impasse with North Korea.

China’s foreign minister, Wang Yi, is also scheduled to visit Seoul on Tuesday for talks with his counterpart, Chung Eui-yong.

Talks aimed at dismantling the North’s nuclear and ballistic missile programmes in return for US sanctions relief have stalled since 2019, despite Donald Trump’s high-profile meetings with Kim Jong-un.

Last month, the UN atomic watchdog said North Korea appeared to have restarted a nuclear reactor that is widely believed to have produced plutonium for nuclear weapons.

Biden’s administration has said it is open to diplomacy to achieve North Korea’s denuclearisation, but has shown no willingness to ease sanctions. Sung Kim, the US envoy for North Korea, said in August in Seoul that he was ready to meet North Korean officials “anywhere, at any time”.

With Reuters, Associated Press and Agence France-Presse

• North Korea
• Asia Pacific

More on this story

North Korean leader Kim Jong-un reveals daughter at ballistic missile test

North Korea’s recent drills show west cannot ignore nuclear threat

North Korea has fired another ballistic missile, South says

Kamala Harris hits out at North Korea’s ‘provocative nuclear rhetoric’ on DMZ visit

North Korea fires ballistic missile towards sea, says South Korean military

North Korea fires suspected ICBM amid signs of preparation for nuclear test

Biden and South Korean president mull expanding joint military exercises

Kim Jong-un says North Korea will use nuclear weapons ‘at any time’ if threatened

Kim Jong-un gets Top Gun treatment in North Korea’s missile coverage

Most viewed.

Missile Threat brings together a wide range of information and analysis relating to the proliferation of cruise and ballistic missiles around the world and the air and missile defense systems designed to defeat them.

MDA and the 2025 Budget

On June 6, the CSIS Missile Defense Project hosted a conversation with Lt. Gen. Heath Collins, Director of the Missile Defense Agency. The discussion explored the Agency's FY2025 programs, priorities, and budgets.

Strategic Landpower Dialogue: A Conversation with GEN James Rainey

Operations in the red sea: lessons for surface warfare, the iran-israel air conflict, one week in, cost and value in air and missile defense intercepts, the pentagon’s next satellite launch is a test for missile defense’s future, getting on track: space and airborne sensors for hypersonic missile defense, defense systems.

Explore the components that go into making missile defense effective, including sensors, interceptors, command and control.

Explore the systems

Missiles of the World

A growing collection of information on various countries’ missile systems, with illustrations and up-to-date information on their capabilities and history.

Browse our collection

Ongoing Projects

Missile Threat features numerous interactive projects and data sets, regularly updated by our team as events unfold. Check back for the latest.

FY 2023 Missile Defense and Defeat Budget Tracker

North korean missile launches & nuclear tests: 1984-present, missile maps and data visualizations, stay up-to-date with missile defense.

The CSIS Missile Defense Project’s monthly newsletter has info on the project’s latest publications, events, and missile defense news.

We host a variety of events to shape the debate about policy, budgets, legislation, and both current and future programs.

Your browser is not supported

Sorry but it looks as if your browser is out of date. To get the best experience using our site we recommend that you upgrade or switch browsers.

Find a solution

• Skip to main content
• Skip to navigation
• hot-topics Trending now
• Guide to Business Aviation Training and Safety 2024
• Airline Business podcast
• First Flight - a new podcast
• Women in Aviation
• Sustainable Aviation newsletter
• 2024 World Air Forces directory
• Singapore Airshow 2024
• Guide to Business Aviation Training and Safety 2023
• Final Boeing 747 delivery
• 2023 Industry forecast
• 2023 World Air Forces directory
• Farnborough 2022
• What will it take to Decarbonise Aviation?
• Guide to Business Aviation Training and Safety 2022
• Ukraine crisis
• The Pilot Survey 2022
• What does the future of aviation look like in 2022?
• World Air Forces directory 2022
• Shell Aviation: What will it take to Decarbonise Aviation?
• EDGE: A new global force in aerospace and defence
• World Airline Rankings 2021
• IATA AGM 2021
• Top 100 aerospace companies
• Defending across the domains
• FlightGlobal Guide to Business Aviation Training and Safety 2021
• 737 Max: Two years on
• The Pilot Survey 2021 Report
• Helicopter Report
• Sustainability at Paris

• Back to parent navigation item
• Systems & Interiors
• Helicopters
• Air transport
• Orders & Deliveries
• Business aviation
• North America
• Latin America
• Asia Pacific
• Middle East
• Military UAVs
• Flight International
• Subscribe to Flight International
• Flight International Opinion
• 110 years of Flight
• Airbus at 50
• Honeywell: Shaping the Future
• CAE: Sky's no limit
• Events & webinars
• Upcoming events
• Upcoming webinars
• On demand webinars
• Airline Strategy Awards 2024
• Airlines 2024 – Website coming soon
• Airline Business

• More from navigation items

Lockheed test fires four Long-Range Anti-Ship Missiles simultaneously

Military airframer and munitions producer Lockheed Martin continues to advance the company’s stealthy Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), recently test firing four of the ship-killing weapons simultaneously.

Lockheed on 3 April announced it had supported the US Navy (USN) during the LRASM’s 12th integrated test event, which saw four of the cruise missiles fired at once, a flight profile Lockheed describes as “historic”.

The LRASM can be air-launched or fired from naval surface ships and ground-based systems.

While Lockheed does not reveal specifics about the test, such as which aircraft type launched the LRASMs, the company says all mission objectives were met.

“The US Navy was able to demonstrate the weapon’s inherent high-end lethality from mission planning through kill chain integration and its effects on the target,” Lockheed says.

Source: Lockheed Martin

The Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile is capable of being carried by the US Navy’s F/A-18 Super Hornet fighter and the US Air Force’s Boeing B-1B heavy bomber

The first LRASM was delivered to the USN  in 2018 , with low-rate production ongoing since then. The ship-killing cruise missile is expected to be one of the most important weapons for the USA, should conflict ignite in the Western Pacific.

In 2022,  war games conducted by the US-based Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) found an adequate supply of LRASMs would be essential to defending Taiwan against invasion by China, which could feature hundreds of enemy surface ships in the waters surrounding the disputed island.

According to the USN, LRASM uses semi-autonomous guidance algorithms to identify and pinpoint targets from “less precise” coordinate data. This in turn reduces the service’s dependency on intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance platforms, communications network links and GPS-based navigation when conducting strikes.

“When operational, LRASM will provide the first increment of a next-generation offensive anti-surface weapon,” the US Naval Air Systems Command says. “[It] will play a significant role in ensuring military access to operate in open ocean and the littorals due to its enhanced ability to discriminate and conduct tactical engagements from extended ranges.”

Lockheed Martin’s ship-killing LRASM stealthy, subsonic cruise missile is expected to play a critical role in any conflict in the Indo-Pacific

During the CSIS Taiwan scenario war games, evaluators found long-range bombers, including Boeing B-52s and Boeing B-1Bs, proved particularly effective when armed with LRASM.

Currently, the US Air Force’s (USAF’s) Boeing B-1B heavy bomber is certificated to deploy LRASMs, as are navy Boeing F/A-18E/F Super Hornet strike fighters.

Lockheed has also been pursuing type approval with its own multi-service F-35 stealth fighter and the Boeing P-8 maritime patrol aircraft.

The USAF had at one point been pursuing LRASM certification for its B-52 heavy bombers, but Lockheed in 2023 said that effort was no longer underway.

The company assembles both the LRASM and the Joint Air-to-Surface Standoff Missile in Troy, Alabama. In 2022, Lockheed completed work on a second production line in Troy, boosting capacity for the two weapon systems.

Lockheed has said it aims to eventually deliver more than 1,000 missiles annually.

“We have continued to invest in the design and development of LRASM’s anti-surface warfare capabilities,” says Lisbeth Vogelpohl, LRASM programme director at Lockheed’s Missiles and Fire Control division.

The USN’s fiscal year 2025 budget documents, which describe LRASM as the most urgently needed anti-ship weapon system, indicate the service plans to continue developing the next iteration of the missile – known as LRASM C-3 – that boasts extend range, advanced survivability and beyond line of sight communications.

More from Ryan Finnerty

Malawi’s vice-president, nine others confirmed dead in Dornier 228 crash

BAE to produce electronic countermeasure pods for US Navy P-8s

First operational Boeing F-15EX arrives with USAF for frontline service

• United States
• United States Navy

Related articles

USAF releases first official images of B-21 in flight

2024-05-23T02:40:00Z By Greg Waldron

The US Air Force has released images of the developmental Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider strategic bomber in flight, as it maintains that the programme is on track.

Chinese fighter drops flares in path of Australian MH-60R

2024-05-07T02:54:00Z By Greg Waldron

A Chinese fighter has conducted a dangerous intercept of a Royal Australian Navy helicopter operating in international waters in support of sanctions against North Korea.

New Zealand dispatches P-8A for first Asian deployment

2024-04-11T05:07:00Z By Greg Waldron

New Zealand will deploy a single Boeing P-8A Poseidon maritime patrol aircraft to support sanctions against North Korea, marking Wellington’s first Asian deployment of the type.

More from Fixed-Wing

USMC upgrading one-third of F/A-18 Hornets to serve until 2030 or later

2024-06-11T15:42:00Z By Jan Tegler

The US Marine Corps (USMC) is now half complete with a modernisation programme for its single-seat Boeing F/A-18Cs and two-seat F/A-18Ds, an effort to boost the ageing jets’ capabilities as the service faces delayed deliveries of Lockheed Martin F-35s.

2024-06-11T15:29:00Z By Ryan Finnerty

The $95 million contract will see the US Navy’s Boeing P-8 maritime patrol jets equipped with a BAE electronic warfare pod intended to expand the non-stealth aircraft’s operating range in contested environments.

2024-06-10T17:48:00Z By Ryan Finnerty

The latest variant of the venerable fourth-generation air superiority fighter will begin operational service in the state of Oregon with the US Air National Guard, which is responsible for homeland defence and air-interdiction missions.

• Advertise with us
• Conferences and Events
• Newsletters
• Paid content

FlightGlobal is the global aviation community’s primary source of news, data, insight, knowledge and expertise. We provide news, data, analytics and advisory services to connect the aviation community globally and help organisations shape their business strategies, identify new opportunities and make better decisions faster.

• Announcements
• Terms and conditions
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• © DVV Media International Limited
• Connect with us on Facebook
• Connect with us on Twitter
• Connect with us on Linked in
• Connect with us on Youtube

Site powered by Webvision Cloud

Unlock our take on the stories that matter for just £22 a month

Breaking news, expert analysis, member-first insights and commentary on the global aviation industry.

Read the May magazine issue on food and climate change

A new nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missile: Just say no

By Robert J. Goldston | July 19, 2023

• Copy link Linked copied

As can be seen in the headlines, the House of Representatives recently passed their version of the National Defense Authorization act, laden with provisions to fight “wokeness” in the military. This will create difficulties for reaching agreement with the Senate on a final bill. However, lost in the headlines is the fact that Congress will have to decide whether to fund the development of a new nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missile (acronym: SLCM-N) and its associated warhead. Based on its 2022 Nuclear Posture Review, the Biden administration zeroed out funding for this system in its budget request for 2024, but both the House version and Senate Armed Services Committee’s version of the National Defense Authorization Act authorize funding for the development of SLCM-N and its warhead. There are, nonetheless, multiple steps ahead to the point of actually appropriating funds (through appropriations bills), and so there are still real opportunities for informed decision-making.

A policy debate [1] is raging about the development and deployment of the new nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile. Advocates [2] , [3] argue that in a world where the United States and Russia are in a state of extreme tension, and China is increasing its nuclear arsenal, the United States needs to strengthen its nuclear weapons capabilities, particularly at the so-called “middle rung” of deterrence, between so-called “tactical” and “strategic.” Those who oppose the new cruise missile [4] , [5] often argue that it is redundant and costly and will create practical impediments for the US Navy’s conventional war-fighting capability. Their arguments are cogent, but the situation is even worse than this. Deployment of such a weapon would seriously deteriorate, not improve, US national security and that of its allies, for reasons touched on in an article in Defense One [6] and a fact sheet by the Physicists’ Coalition for Nuclear Threat Reduction. [7] I flesh out these arguments here.

From a top-level perspective, at a time of increased tensions, renewed efforts at arms control and restraint are most needed. It is important to pull the most incendiary logs off the fire first, as President Reagan recognized in signing the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty in 1987. Now is not the time to add especially flammable fuel to the fire. Much worse than being redundant and costly, the sea-launched cruise missile is extraordinarily dangerous, having even more risky characteristics than the low-yield W76-2 warheads loaded onto submarine-launched ballistic missiles following the Trump administration’s 2018 Nuclear Posture Review.

There are at least three strongly compelling reasons that the SLCM-N is dangerous to US national security:

• To an adversary, a SLCM-N is indistinguishable from a conventional sea-launched cruise missile, so the very existence of the SLCM-N makes the use of a conventional SLCM a possible trigger for thermonuclear war, due to misattribution of a conventionally armed missile as one carrying a nuclear warhead. Since the Baltic and Black Seas are only 500 miles from Moscow and the Yellow Sea is only 500 miles from Beijing, with Taiwan about 1,000 miles from Beijing, stealthy SLCM-Ns with a range of 1,500 miles would create the risk for Moscow and Beijing of an undetected decapitating nuclear strike, and as a result create for the United States enhanced risk of disastrous split-second miscalculation by its potential adversaries. This is what the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty was designed to mitigate, and what the current restraint on intermediate-range nuclear missiles in Europe is continuing. The United States would be throwing explosive logs onto an already hot fire with the SLCM-N.

Conventional Tomahawk sea-launched cruise missiles were employed in 1991 during the Persian Gulf War. Misattribution was not a significant risk, as Kuwait is nearly 2,000 miles from Moscow, and relations at the time between the United States under President George H.W. Bush and the Soviet Union under President Gorbachev were favorable. After President Bush removed all nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missiles from service in 1992, conventional Tomahawk cruise missiles were used in Iraq, Bosnia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Yugoslavia, Somalia, Yemen, Libya, and Syria [8] without any risk of misattribution.

NATO’s defense of Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, and/or Estonia would likely require the use of barrages of conventionally armed sea-launched cruise missiles. This would render misattribution by Russia an existential risk for the United States. Crucially, the deployment of SLCM-Ns would reduce, not enhance, the United States’ ability to defend its NATO allies.

• More generally, any use of a sea-launched cruise missile would be extraordinarily ambiguous; an adversary could not know whether it carried a conventional or nuclear payload, or, if the warhead were nuclear, what its yield might be. Greatly enhancing this ambiguity is an adversary’s inability to know where a stealthy, maneuverable cruise missile is headed, even if it is detected after launch. The SLCM-N blurs the escalation ladder in an extraordinarily dangerous way, through wide ambiguity in both its yield and its target.

The ambiguity is even worse than that which surrounds a submarine-launched ballistic (not cruise) missile armed with a low-yield W76-2. This missile certainly carries a nuclear warhead, and its trajectory can be determined. Because this submarine-launched missile is ballistic, adversaries will know in advance if it is headed to a strategic target in Moscow or Beijing, or to a battlefield tactical target.

• Arms-racing is now a three-player game. The United States is planning to build 38 Virginia-class attack submarines, each of which could carry up to 16 SLCM-N’s, with a potential total of 608 warheads [2] , even ignoring the possibility that these missiles could be placed on surface ships. Assuming reasonably that both Russia and China would feel that they must match such increased firepower, the United States could eventually be facing twice as many additional warheads as it mounted.

Adding nuclear warheads is not a wise long-term strategy for US security in the modern threat environment. In a three-way arms race, while the United loses in a two-for-one ratio when it increases nuclear warhead numbers, it can gain by a two-to-one ratio if it negotiates warhead limitations or, better, reductions with Russia and China.

The bottom line is that a new sea-launched cruise missile will deteriorate US national security in both the short and the long term. Furthermore, the new three-peer nuclear arms environment we are facing provides a strong incentive for arms control, not for arms racing.

[1] https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF12084

[2] https://www.heritage.org/defense/commentary/the-nuclear-sea-launched-cruise-missile-worth-the-investment-deterrence

[3] https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/in-depth-research-reports/issue-brief/strengthening-deterrence-with-slcm-n/

[4] https://carnegieendowment.org/2022/05/12/taxpayers-should-question-pitch-to-fund-another-naval-nuclear-weapon-pub-87120

[5] https://armscontrolcenter.org/fact-sheet-nuclear-sea-launched-cruise-missiles-are-wasteful

[6] https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/04/biden-should-sink-new-nuclear-weapon/173473/

[7] https://physicistscoalition.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/SLCM-N-Fact-Seet-April-20-2023-FINAL.pdf?emci=dce192ed-0f0a-ee11-907c-00224832eb73&emdi=ea000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000001&ceid=

[8] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tomahawk_(missile)

Together, we make the world safer.

The Bulletin elevates expert voices above the noise. But as an independent nonprofit organization, our operations depend on the support of readers like you. Help us continue to deliver quality journalism that holds leaders accountable. Your support of our work at any level is important . In return, we promise our coverage will be understandable, influential, vigilant, solution-oriented, and fair-minded. Together we can make a difference.

Keywords: SLCM-N , nuclear-armed , sea-launched cruise missile Topics: Analysis , Nuclear Risk , Nuclear Weapons

We consider ourselves to be a civilized sentient species, yet we spend trillions of dollars annually building WMD that can destroy the human race in multiple ways. How dare we consider ourselves ‘civilized’ when we focus our efforts on multiple ways to exterminate mankind?

I agree fully but as we cannot trust foreign nuclear armed nations, I would argue for a naval-based platform of defensive ABM missiles, preferably hypersonic to destroy offensive enemy missiles during launch phase. Instant reliable launch location & tracking is also required.

Robert J. Goldston

Robert J. Goldston is a professor of Astrophysical Sciences at Princeton University. He was the director of the US Energy... Read More

The West has a 15-month opportunity for a new nuclear deal with Iran that precludes an Iranian Bomb

By Seyed Hossein Mousavian

Can minimum deterrence save nuclear arms control?

By Stephen J. Cimbala , Lawrence J. Korb

Once used as trash dumps, Sri Lanka’s wetlands are remade as flood-buffering parks

By Tristan Bove

How AI surveillance threatens democracy everywhere

By Abi Olvera

Despite the risks, Russia continues to use Ukraine’s Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant as a source of leverage

By Darya Dolzikova

Why a substantive and verifiable no-first-use treaty for nuclear weapons is possible

Related posts.

Another reason to cancel the Sentinel missile: the rising cost of its nuclear warhead

By stephen young.

Formal risk assessments and nuclear arms control: exploring the value of modern methodologies

By vicki bier , robert j. budnitz , olli heinonen , richard c. lanza , ronald f. lehman , sally leivesley , charles f. mcmillan , george h. miller , anita nilsson , john organek , robert n. schock, receive email updates, bulletin daily.

Why a misleading “red team” study of the gene synthesis industry wrongly casts doubt on industry safety

By International Gene Synthesis Consortium (IGSC)

MIT researchers ordered and combined parts of the 1918 pandemic influenza virus. Did they expose a security flaw?

By Matt Field

A U.S.-China War over Taiwan: Why America Might Not Be Able to Win

Summary and Key Points: President Biden has declared that the U.S. would defend Taiwan if China attacked, marking a shift from strategic ambiguity.

-A conflict would involve extensive missile strikes on Taiwan by China, countered by U.S. Navy carrier groups and stealth aircraft.

-Guam's defense is crucial due to its strategic location. The U.S. might also conduct cyberattacks against China.

-A blockade and amphibious assault by China would follow. Both sides could suffer significant naval losses, emphasizing the need for military-diplomatic strategies to manage the conflict.

U.S. Military Strategy for Defending Taiwan Against China

The United States has maintained strategic ambiguity for years about what it would do if China attacked Taiwan. Now, U.S. President Joe Biden has brought new attention to the question over the years.

In an interview with 60 Minutes , Biden said on Sept. 18, 2022, that the United States would indeed fight to protect Taiwan against China. That follows remarks made in Tokyo in May of 2021, during which Biden said the United States would engage in battle to defend Taiwan. Currently, the Americans provide arms to the Taiwanese, but the U.S. has also recognized Beijing’s One China policy.

What would the United States do militarily if there was an attack on Taiwan?

From Wars of Words to a War of Missiles

Taiwan sits about 110 miles off the coast of mainland China. Beijing claims the island as its own. Chinese President Xi Jinping believes that total reunification is unavoidable, and he has not ruled out the use of force to maintain the One China policy. Any shooting war that draws in the United States would be bloody, with death and destruction mounting on both sides.

At the outset of a war against Taiwan, China would deliver a shock-and-awe missile attack at military targets on the island. Hundreds of missiles launched from shore, ship, and airplane would explode on Taiwan. 

The U.S. Navy would have aircraft carrier battle groups in the area, with supercarriers escorted by destroyers, frigates, and cruisers, and supplemented by submarines. They would try to stay out of the range of China’s anti-ship missiles while firing their own over-the-horizon missiles at the ships and airplanes attacking Taiwan.

The United States would also be flying stealth warplanes such as the F-35. China would answer with fighters such as the J-20, which has radar-evading attributes. There would likely be missile exchanges between the two sides, and the Navy would use the Aegis combat system to ward off enemy missiles.

Protect Guam At All Costs 

Guam could also come under Chinese attack. The closest U.S. territory to China, Guam is one of the most strategic islands in East Asia. Without holding Guam, defending Taiwan would be difficult. China has H-6 bombers that could reach Guam and fire cruise and ballistic missiles, including hypersonic weapons. Guam currently uses the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense long-range anti-missile system. An ongoing missile defense modernization effort would direct additional air defenses to Guam, but that upgrade isn’t expected to be completed until 2026.

The United States could also use a cyber attack against China to disable its radar and sensor systems and to stymie its missiles’ targeting and guidance systems. China would probably conduct its own cyber operation against Taiwan.

Preparing for a landing

Before sending any troops to the island, China would probably conduct a blockade of Taiwan to ensure no arms shipments are delivered by allies. The Chinese would also patrol no-fly and no-shipping zones in the area to consolidate its control of airspace and sea. Finally, China would deploy its submarines close to Taiwan to fire land-attack cruise missiles at the island. Then a Chinese amphibious attack would begin.

China can attack U.S. carriers with missiles from land, sea, and air in many different ways. This means the Americans have to plan for one of their carriers to be damaged or destroyed. As unthinkable as it seems, it is time for the U.S. Navy to realize that this could happen. The event would leave the Navy dependent on its other aircraft carrier to pick up the slack. Meanwhile, having destroyed or damaged one American carrier, China would continue its amphibious attack against Taiwan. 

This would be a terrible scenario for the United States, but it goes both ways: The Americans could sink a Chinese aircraft carrier and a number of support ships. This could either strengthen Chinese resolve, or deter them and create an opening for diplomacy. 

What to Do on Taiwan? 

There are no good options for the United States to protect Taiwan. Every scenario in which China attacks leads to naval losses for the U.S. The best hope is that military-to-military communication reduces the damage, creating room for diplomacy and a cease-fire. Biden may want to reconsider protecting Taiwan without first establishing clear military options. The Pentagon needs to make sure that the White House understands the price that would be paid for protecting Taiwan.

About the Author 

Dr. Brent M. Eastwood  is the author of Humans, Machines, and Data: Future Trends in Warfare . He is an Emerging Threats expert and former U.S. Army Infantry officer. You can follow him on Twitter @BMEastwood . He holds a Ph.D. in Political Science and Foreign Policy/ International Relations.

All images are Creative Commons and Shutterstock. 

All products and listings featured on Condé Nast Traveler are independently selected by our editors. If you purchase something through our links, we may earn an affiliate commission.

The Best Cruise Ships in the World: The Gold List 2024

By CNT Editors

Consider Gold List the answer to the question our editors get asked more than any other: What are your favorite places to stay? Our 30th annual iteration of the world’s greatest hotels and cruises captures nearly a year’s worth of work: This collection represents hundreds of hours of researching, scouting, and impassioned debating by our team of editors in seven cities across the globe. But more than that, it reflects our ongoing love affair with the places where we stay, which often become our gateways to entire destinations. Read on to inspire your next cruise.

See the full Gold List here .

Oceania Cruises' Marina is one of 12 ships chosen by our editors for 2024.

Celebrity Beyond Arrow

Cruise ships often get compared to floating hotels or resorts, but here’s one that feels like a floating Vegas show. Applause, please, for the glittering peacock made from Swarovski crystals and the Magic Carpet platform that shimmies up and down the ship, cantilevered over the water for some of the best seats in the house, while in the Martini Bar, a troupe of bartenders juggle shakers to the sound of “We Didn’t Start the Fire.” Beyond is one of the largest ships in Celebrity’s Edge class, and all that space is used to maximize the drama. A whole corridor is filled with a glowing installation of bronze sculptures reflected in infinity mirrors; a favorite anchorage was Eden, a beautiful, biophiliac bubble for hiding away in, watching the ship’s wake through triple-height windows and dawdling in swivel chairs that resemble green carnations. As for the cast, there are some stellar performers: Kelly Hoppen designed most of the interiors; Daniel Boulud’s debut signature restaurant at sea, Le Voyage, has an impeccable, globe-trotting menu alighting on Brazilian moqueca and tamarind prawns. But top of the bill is Captain Kate McCue, the first American woman to captain a cruise ship. A captain hasn’t been this synonymous with their ship since the days of Merrill Stubing; follow her social media for a glimpse into the art of ship navigation. During our short, prelaunch cruise, we had an itinerary that involved looping round and round the Isle of Wight—a short trip, but one that was big on sheer spectacle. Three-night sailings from $300 per person. —Rick Jordan

Delfin II Arrow

The Amazon River has the opacity of chocolate milk and is almost deathlike in its stillness—which is wild when you consider how much life thrives there. It was on a nine-day journey through Peru with Lindblad Expeditions and National Geographic that I learned this, as we spent five of those days exploring the jungle by boat. Our chariot: the Delfin II , a Relais & Châteaux vessel with 14 thoughtfully appointed staterooms.

Most days began with a crack-of-dawn skiff ride soundtracked by the squall of jewel-winged, dusky-headed parakeets. The photographers pulled out their football lenses and the birders gasped from behind their binoculars as naturalists pointed out an elegant snowy egret picking its way through a mudbank, a neotropic cormorant spreading its gothy black wings like a vampire, and the somber Jabiru stork, the largest flying bird in South America, standing like a dour English butler on a naked tree limb. Also flagged were capuchin monkeys, giant river otters, flamboyant bromeliads, and—after dark—scores of caimans and capybaras.

We spent one muggy morning in a Kukama village, where indigenous women wove raffia bowls and cooked catfish, and another morning paddling the river—an outing which culminated with a pod of pink river dolphins leaping from the water mere feet from our kayaks. (Even our seen-it-all naturalist, Sandro, clapped like a schoolgirl.)

This deep in the Amazon jungle, there were no other tourists. When we did see signs of human life, they were usually fishermen or park rangers. And because there was no Wi-Fi on the Delfin II and a near total blackout on cell reception, downtime was spent attending lectures on Amazonian ecology, sampling native fruits (how the aptly named ice cream bean hasn’t been pitched on Shark Tank yet, I’ll never know), and buddying up to the ship bar, where I made fast friends of fellow guests. (Expedition cruises always draw a fascinating lot; my cohort included a microbiologist, metaphysical transcendentalist, and one of the earliest Apple employees.)

The highlight of the trip, however, was hiking through the jungle with a local tracker who showed us a brown-throated three-toed sloth, Goliath bird-eating tarantula, junior anaconda, and a century-old strangler fig. When we finally emerged from the bush, we were treated to a spectacular tangerine-and-charcoal sunset punctured by bolts of lighting. It was surreal and intense, just like everything else in this untouched corner of the world. Eight-day sailings from $5,730 per person. —Ashlea Halpern

Ritz-Carlton Evrima Arrow

Ritz-Carlton’s first foray into cruising, the Evrima is a hotel-at-sea experience that might just be the antidote to all the big ship itineraries. Think ultra-small ship luxury (at half the capacity of the Seabourns and Regents) with plenty of scenery options to choose from—the European Mediterranean (routes from Turkey to the Canary Islands) from spring through fall, and the Caribbean (San Juan to St. Barts) in winter—and a younger crowd than most of the luxury cruise market; mostly culture lovers with a dearth of cruising experience who can't wait to get ashore to the Côte d’Azur village restaurants. The 624-foot ship is the first in a fleet of three emerging over the next few years, and it still feels spacious with 149 suites, two pools, a cigar humidor, six bars (the interior Living Room and top-floor Observation Lounge, The Bar, and bars located at the Marina Terrace, the Pool House, and Mistral), a beauty salon and spa deck, water-level marina terrace with water toys, and a fitness center. The 246 staff range from deck crew to your cabin’s personal concierge, all of whom are dubbed the ship’s Ladies and Gentlemen—but titles feel almost superfluous aboard Evrima , where everyone from the tender drivers to dining leads will pause to actually get to know you and recall your name and story (and even your drink order) to make the entire experience feel organic and warm. It’s almost like you’re spending the night in someone’s home, which just so happens to be a 624-foot mega-yacht. And the Evrima itinerary has plenty of free time and overnight ports of call in its sailings, so you can head ashore for a day, or even an entire evening late into the night—gallivanting, dining, and imbibing with the new friends you'll no doubt meet onboard. Seven-night sailings from $5,800 per person. —Shannon McMahon

Oceania Marina Arrow

Is there any Marina passenger who doesn’t wish—even for a second—to confine himself to his stateroom on debarkation day? Perhaps only the smarty pants who booked their next cruise before this one ends. Otherwise, how can an epicurean cruiser (that’s Marina ’s crowd) not pine for another shot at the new wine list starring 80 highly coveted, hard-to-snag labels, including swoon-worthy Super Tuscans? You’ll long for one more brag-worthy chance to sip The Mascot, a label from Harlan family pedigree (think cult fave Harlan Estate); the Polo Grill’s deft sommelier knows exactly which prime steak pairs best. Despite eight compelling complimentary restaurants (Red Ginger’s signature lobster pad thai is still a must-devour), Marina vibes far more than great meals. Work up a sweat storm playing pickleball on deck 16 or braving core conditioning in the gym. Melt into a marine detox wrap (I love the juniper and lemon scent) at Aquamar Spa + Vitality Center, then sink into the spa terrace’s bubbling hot tub. Get down and dirty in the artist loft by painting a Venetian mask and playing Impressionist. In the hands-on culinary center, learn to cure a fish or preserve a lemon. Come May 2024, Marina debuts a splashy redo. Fall in love again with revamped avocado toast—bravo to the taco-spiced shrimp topping—in the new wellness-driven Aquamar kitchen. Where you lie your head hardly matters. An entry 291-square-foot stateroom starring a four-pillow, soft-sheet bed feels mighty spacious and sports Bulgari shampoo. That said, the top-to-bottom penthouse suites’ glam reno is beyond covetable, from the expanded bath to a boatload of enviable perks. Ten-day sailings from $1,999 per person. —Janice Wald Henderson

Sarah James

Jessica Puckett

Todd Plummer

Lale Arikoglu

Trollfjord Arrow

Who better to guide you through Norway’s most remote reaches—including the Svalbard archipelago, the northernmost inhabited islands on the planet—than a Norwegian cruise company that knows the area’s every crag and fjord? Hurtigruten is an Oslo-based line whose ships have traversed these waters since 1893, ferrying freight, mail, and passengers to the communities along the rugged coast. In 2023, to celebrate its 130th anniversary, the company’s flagship, the newly refurbished, 500-passenger MS Trollfjord (named for a fjord in the Vesterålen archipelago) began sailing two hybrids of its original 34-port Norwegian Coastal Express, calling at several of the towns and villages on the original route. From September through April, the North Cape Express (a 13-day, 16-port itinerary) sails from Oslo to the North Cape and then south to Bergen. In the summertime, the Svalbard Express’s eight-day journey begins in Bergen and progresses north, with extended port calls and excursions in seven towns before entering the Arctic Circle and pulling into Longyearbyen, a mining town on Spitsbergen, Svalbard’s main island. On both routes Trollfjord offers its (mostly European) passengers an uncommon way to explore the region, with uniquely Nordic cultural touches to connect them to the country. There’s a pre-boarding spread of Norwegian fare in the ship’s departure lounge, and Trollfjord ’s three restaurants prioritize Scandinavian cuisine (salmon, reindeer, and lingonberries, oh my!) and the food culture of the indigenous Sámi people. The ship’s 277 staterooms and 12 suites (with walk-in closets, corner bathtubs and floor-to-ceiling windows) offer a cozy retreat from the sometimes-harsh weather. And typically Nordic diversions such as aquavit tastings, oceanview saunas and polar plunges leave you in no doubt about where you are and who you’re sailing with. 10-day sailings from $3,082 per person. —Sarah Greaves-Gabbadon

Seven Seas Navigator Arrow

Imagine the most luxurious hotel you’ve ever stayed in. That’s precisely what stepping onboard the Regent Seven Seas Cruises Navigator feels like. And while the opulence and grandeur shine through every square inch of space, it’s worth mentioning that the staff are what make the experience memorable, remembering your name, preferences, likes, and dislikes from the second you step afoot the eight-deck vessel.

The 248 ultraluxe all-suite accommodations feel like your home away from home—despite their capacious interiors—and your personalized steward makes sure of that with thoughtful touches from the moment you check in. Thanks to a revamp in 2019, the ship feels pristine with a new library—complete with a faux fireplace—and sleek state-of-the-art furnishings (including the cruise line’s bespoke mattresses and bed linens) in each of the rooms. However, what makes the Navigator stand out from its counterparts is its intimate size, as it’s the smallest in Regent’s fleet. Everything onboard feels just an arm’s reach away, and you’ll quickly bond with fellow passengers after spending the day together on one of the complimentary shore excursions, such as tours by local guides, cooking classes, and other intimate adventures.

During my Mediterranean voyage, days were spent immersing ourselves in new cities, whereas nights began with a freshly shaken ice-cold martini followed by an exuberant dinner, with a stop in the Seven Seas Lounge for whatever was on tap that night, ranging from cabaret to karaoke. At the end of the journey, I left wanting more and with a suitcase full of clean clothes, thanks to one of the many attentive touches onboard: the included laundry service. 10-night sailings from $3,360 per person. —Rachel Dube

Seabourn Ovation Arrow

“We are not the Rat Pack,” quips Andrew Pedder, the witty Yorkshire-born captain of Seabourn Ovation. He's referring to himself and the other senior officers, for any guests who may have wandered into their impromptu panel session instead of the musical show taking place later that evening. The Q&A—which covers everything from the prettiest ports to the number of Champagne bottles typically consumed during a seven-day voyage—is part of a last-minute program of activities arranged for an unexpected sea day when it’s too windy to dock in the South of France. This is mid-October, on one of the ship’s jaunts around the Mediterranean for the season, and no one seems to mind the change of plan (although when we do explore, all the islands we visit—Menorca, Corsica, Elba—are blissfully tourist-free). It simply means more time for spa treatments, soaks in the outdoor hot tubs, and afternoon tea in the observation bar. Even then, it only feels like there are 60 passengers onboard, rather than 600. The restaurants are excellent, from Sushi, where you can sit at the counter watching the Japanese chefs at work, to poolside Earth & Ocean for Tandoori-style rotisserie chicken and Madras-style white bean cassoulet. Suites are spacious, each one with a balcony. West End–standard entertainment includes a magician and a chart-topping classical singer. But what makes this ultraluxe ship really memorable is the relaxed, on-point service by staff who remember your name and coffee order, or even a familiar face from a sailing five years ago. Seven-day sailings from $2,649 per person. —Emma Love

Silver Endeavour Arrow

Silversea is defined by its far-flung itineraries and exceptional onboard service (think Moët Champagne as you take in an iceberg calving in Antarctica). But the 220-passenger Silver Endeavour, new to the fleet and already a classic, raises every bar. Rooms start at a spacious 356 square feet and have luxury perks like pillow menus and a personalized bar, making them the best in all of Silversea’s array of ships. As far as food goes, premium Ars Italica Osetra caviar is complimentary and around-the-clock, though the Dover sole paired with a label from the rare wine menu at La Dame would have you believing you were in Paris. And the signature Otium spa celebrates pampering as much as it does wellness—don’t skip on the oxygen-boosting Golden Radiance facial. You may find yourself at any given hour glimpsing ice walls through the Drake Passage and remembering that the best part about this ship is the awe-inspiring places it dares to take you. 10-day sailings from $13,150. —Janice Wald Henderson

Scarlet Lady Arrow

Although new to the cruise industry, Virgin Voyages has already begun to set itself apart from its predecessors. When first stepping on the Scarlet Lady, cruisers are met with a rousing, upbeat staff that serve as gurus around the ship and are experts on everything from beauty to juicing. While the Scarlet Lady takes you on a familiar route around the Caribbean, the on-shore excursions available are what make this sail memorable. Take a leap of faith on daring outings such as the Waterfalls of Damajagua in Puerto Plata, where guests make their way down seven of the 27 natural slides and waterfalls. After the exhilarating experience, travelers can sit down with locals and come together over Dominican staples such as pollo guisado, tostones, and mangú. You can always get local delicacies while docked, but while onboard, you must snag a reservation at the Test Kitchen. It’s an experimental dining experience where the menu always evolves. You go in only seeing a small card with ingredients listed for the night’s meal, but everything else is up to the imagination. One might find cucumbers puréed and frozen into ice cream as dessert, or beets formed and prepared like steak. While en route to the next port, the hard reset one does at the Redemption Spa leaves your body feeling anew; it’s impossible to come back from vacation feeling the same as when you departed. On any Virgin Voyages ship, you’ll love the indulgent atmosphere, whether you’re catering to your sweet tooth by narrowing down your favorite gelato of the day, grabbing a drink at one of the five bars that stake claim to having the largest tequila supply on the seven seas, or finally getting that tattoo you’ve been thinking about for ages after visiting the ship’s tattoo parlor, Squid Ink. Seven-day sailings from $2,100 per person. —Paris Wilson

Queen Mary 2 Arrow

Six days sailing from England to New York across the vast Atlantic had the potential to bore me to stupefaction, but it turned out I had nothing to fear. “The ship is the destination,” said an entertainment director for Queen Mary 2 , who oversees a program that makes this cruise liner the undisputed hub of creative and intellectual stimulation on the high seas. Where else can you attend the annual Literature Festival At Sea, meeting top fiction and nonfiction authors like the late PJ O’Rourke, Bernadine Evaristo, and Louis de Bernières? And where else can you visit a planetarium, watch a Royal Shakespeare theater production, or hear guest speakers discuss artwork investments and the history of airport drug mules?

In between spa massages and table tennis rallies, I nourished my mind in the mahogany library before nourishing my body at the Princess Grill and Queens Grill restaurants, scarfing dishes like croquette of suckling pig, paired with excellent vintages and followed by mango panna cotta. On the final stretch of the journey, as dolphins leapt over the horizon and the Statue of Liberty loomed into view, my heart sank a little—New York City awaited, yet I didn’t want to disembark. That’s quite an achievement. Seven-day sailings from $1,389 per person. —Noo Saro-Wiwa

World Navigator Arrow

During my first few hours aboard the Atlas Ocean Voyages World Navigator, I felt a bit like I had inadvertently crashed a family reunion: Seemingly everyone else aboard this Arctic expedition had just sailed to Antarctica on the Navigator six months before, so several crew members and guests spent much of embarkation day hugging and catching up. With a maximum occupancy of 196, it’s already an intimate ship, but the fact that the relatively young brand, which debuted in 2019, could develop such an impressive number of repeat travelers in such a short spell speaks volumes. Many told me they were drawn to Atlas because of its eco-friendly bona fides (the new-build ship makes use of hybrid engines from Rolls-Royce designed to leave minimal impact), but the creature comforts on board certainly help. While the star attraction of such an expedition voyage is what lies beyond the decks—access to remote Antarctic fjords that larger vessels can’t dream of traversing, or spotting polar bears loping along pearly glaciers in the Arctic—I made the most of my time in between Zodiac expeditions. The multi-jet shower in my stateroom was sublime after damp and rigorous treks, the heated massage beds in the only L’Occitane Spa at sea are a dream, and the Arctic summer’s 24 hours of sunshine made the Dome observation deck a prime perch to cozy up with a book at any time of day or night. There was neither internet nor cell phone connectivity during my entire eight-day journey sailing thanks to the remote latitudes (though Atlas guests now have access to full Starlink satellite coverage), which meant this was the longest I’d been offline since the 1990s—and yet somehow, drifting through the surreal landscape in this cosseting bubble, I didn’t miss scrolling or chatting with the outside world one bit. Seven-night sailings from $4,749 per person. —Sarah Khan

Westerdam Arrow

A passenger who is well below senior age dances the robot to classic rock, to R&B, to country music, and to disco hits as talented singers and a live band perform most nights in the Rolling Stone Lounge, on Holland America Line’s Westerdam . His mechanical movements are a source of amusement and encouragement; if he can take over the dance floor, so can we with our own moves. The 1,916-passenger Westerdam is beloved as a traditional cruise ship, with its smaller-than-mega-ship size, deep blue hull, wraparound outdoor promenade deck, and details such as fresh flowers all around, celebrating the 150-year-old cruise line’s Dutch roots. Tradition does not mean staid. There’s rock and roll. There’s a trendy top-of-ship pickleball court.

On an Alaska cruise, my husband and I start our days with a jolt of caffeine via the baristas at Explorations Central, the ship’s cushy, contemporary, forward-facing observation lounge, before heading off on adventures such as joining other passengers in synchronized paddling a large canoe to see the ancient yet diminishing ice of Juneau’s Mendenhall Glacier. Back on the ship, we indulge in excellent burgers, topped with Gouda and applewood-smoked bacon and served in fast-food wrapping from a stand at the covered Lido pool. We enjoy sustainable Alaska seafood—grilled salmon, fennel-crusted halibut, fried cod—in between cocktails made with local gin, served on real glacial ice. From the veranda of our classic aft cabin, mesmerizing views of the ship’s wake, seemingly endless forest, and a distant, blue-tinged glacier clear our brain. We’re ready for more of the dancing man. Seven-day sailings from $379 per person. —Fran Golden

By signing up you agree to our User Agreement (including the class action waiver and arbitration provisions ), our Privacy Policy & Cookie Statement and to receive marketing and account-related emails from Traveller. You can unsubscribe at any time. This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

US Navy warships in the Red Sea are fighting off missiles new to combat that are 'way faster' than anything else, destroyer captain says

• US Navy warships in the Middle East have been facing off against anti-ship ballistic missiles.
• The Houthis introduced these missiles into combat for the first time in late 2023.
• The captain of an American destroyer said they are "way faster" than anything else.

US Navy warships operating in the Red Sea have been intercepting deadly ballistic missiles that are "way faster" than anything else, according to the commanding officer of an American destroyer that has shot them down.

Anti-ship ballistic missiles are a dangerous weapon that no military had ever faced in combat until recently when the Houthis started firing them into key Middle Eastern waterways late last year as part of their ongoing attacks on international shipping lanes.

Since then, the Iran-backed rebels have fired dozens of anti-ship ballistic missiles into the Red Sea and Gulf of Aden. US warships in the region have intercepted these missiles on numerous occasions, though some of the weapons have struck commercial vessels. Civilians were killed during an attack in March.

An anti-ship ballistic missile "is just way faster than anything else, Cmdr. Jeremy Robertson, captain of the guided-missile destroyer USS Carney, told reporters during a media event on Monday. He said that while the missiles are a challenge, "we have certain capabilities to be able to detect stuff like that."

The Carney was the first US warship in the region to intercept Houthi threats in the fight that began in October 2023. The destroyer was involved in dozens of engagements during its monthslong deployment — destroying anti-ship ballistic missiles , land-attack cruise missiles, and drones — and it also carried out multiple strikes against the rebels inside Yemen.

The Houthis maintain a sizable arsenal of anti-ship ballistic missiles, according to an analysis by the the International Institute for Strategic Studies think tank.

Some of the missiles are Iranian in origin, while others just contain parts from Tehran. US Central Command has not identified specific missiles that have been used in any of the Houthi attacks, but ballistic missiles, generally, fly at faster speeds than cruise missiles.

Related stories

The anti-ship ballistic missile "threat is very challenging — it's very dynamic, and it's very fast," Robertson said. "These are certainly very dangerous areas, and every interaction is completely different from one another."

Robertson said that his sailors work very quickly to engage these missiles because they must. From start to finish, the complex process of detecting a threat, making sure it's real, sorting the trajectory, and engaging, may last "anywhere from nine to 20 seconds," he said.

The Carney was ready for the threat though. "Our systems are doing exactly what we've designed them to do," Robertson said. "We have training pipelines that build on this threat as well, and so we certainly do a lot of training to make sure the team is ready to handle that threat."

During a visit to the Red Sea earlier this year, Business Insider spoke with Navy officers aboard USS Dwight D. Eisenhower , an aircraft carrier, and USS Gravely , a destroyer, about the Houthi anti-ship ballistic missile threat .

They similarly praised the combat systems on their warships for working as intended and said their sailors are properly leaning and training to defeat the threats.

Anti-ship ballistic missiles emerged as a growing concern for the US military long before the conflict with the Houthi conflict began, as Washington looks across the Pacific at China and its growing arsenal of formidable, long-range missiles.

A potential clash between the US and China would unfold across the maritime domain , making anti-ship capabilities a crucial factor.

Experts, including former Navy officers, previously told BI that the Houthi anti-ship missile capabilities don't quite stack up against what China has in its arsenal . Still, the ongoing engagements in the Middle East are providing the Navy with valuable, first-ever combat experience — and information — to deal with these dangerous missiles.

The Carney has also taken on other missile threats beyond those launched by the Houthis during its lengthy deployment.

Last month, after the destroyer moved out of the Middle East and into the eastern Mediterranean Sea, it used its SM-3 interceptors for the first time to shoot down an Iranian medium-range ballistic missile amid Tehran's unprecedented aerial attack against Israel.

The Carney finally returned home to Mayport, Florida on Sunday to wrap up a deployment that lasted more than seven months.

"I could not be more proud of what the Carney team has done since September," Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Lisa Franchetti said aboard the warship earlier this month, welcoming the crew back to the US.

"Called to action on the very first day that you entered the US 5th Fleet, you conducted 51 engagements in six months," Franchetti said. "The last time our Navy directly engaged the enemy to the degree that you have was way back in World War II."

Watch: See the hectic flight deck of a US warship fighting Houthis in the Red Sea

• Main content

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Bret Stephens

America Needs Big Wins. These Would Be Three.

By Bret Stephens

Opinion Columnist

In 1977, Ronald Reagan shared his thoughts on the Cold War with his aide Richard Allen. “My idea of American policy toward the Soviet Union is simple, and some would say simplistic,” the future president said. “It is this: We win, and they lose. What do you think of that?”

This year, Joe Biden cast the purpose of his presidency as a struggle against authoritarianism, at home and abroad. What’s his theory of victory?

He doesn’t appear to have one. His style of governance is to manage threats, not defeat them. He has sought to provide Ukraine with sufficient weaponry not to lose to Vladimir Putin. But even before congressional Republicans forced a spending hiatus, he was reluctant to give Ukraine the types or numbers of weapons it needed to evict Russian forces from its territory. He believes Israel has a right to protect itself. But his previous insistence that Hamas has to be defeated has given way to a U.S.-backed cease-fire resolution that effectively ensures Hamas’s survival.

He has vowed that Iran will never get nuclear weapons. But in the face of Iran’s refusal to give international inspectors access to its nuclear facilities, the United States worked to soften a diplomatic censure . He has promised to defend Taiwan in the event of an invasion. But projected U.S. military spending, when adjusted for inflation, is essentially flat , and U.S. naval power isn’t keeping pace with China’s growth.

What about the threat at home? Biden is sleepwalking to defeat against a felonious adversary who three years ago incited violence to overturn an election. He has the lowest approval rating of his time in office: 37.6 percent, according to a polling average . Jimmy Carter and George H.W. Bush were in similar territory at similar points in their one-term presidencies.

Joe Biden desperately needs some wins — real, not cosmetic, ones. Who in his administration is thinking about how to get him some?

The Gaza cease-fire isn’t it, at least not in itself. It merely punts a problem that needs to be solved: Hamas’s continued grip over the territory. It begins with a six-week pause in the fighting that might lead to the release of some Israeli hostages in exchange for hundreds of Palestinian prisoners. But it risks falling apart because no Israeli government will retreat from all of Gaza while Hamas retains power, and Hamas won’t release all the hostages or meet the deal’s other terms while Israeli forces remain in the territory.

That means the cease-fire could fall apart closer to the election, when Biden will least want another Middle East crisis. What could rescue it is a deal with Saudi Arabia — the kingdom’s recognition of Israel plus an Arab security force in Gaza in exchange for a U.S. defense guarantee and ambiguous Israeli promises of an eventual Palestinian state.

Will it work after the administration has done so much to insult and antagonize dislikable leaders in Jerusalem and Riyadh? Or will those leaders bide their time to deliver the prize to Donald Trump? That’s a question — and a lesson — for the future.

Ukraine could be another win for Biden, an easier one. It’s good that Washington finally supplied the Ukrainians with longer-range ATACM missiles that allowed them to hold a wider range of Russian targets at risk. What took so long? Why does Ukraine always need to come to the verge of defeat before the president finally relents and gives it the weapons it needs?

Ukraine still doesn’t have F-16s, a year after they were promised. Why not add U.S.-made cruise missiles to the mix, to make the F-16s that much more potent? Or better, open a U.S. air corridor to Kyiv in the spirit of Harry Truman’s Berlin airlift? It would signal American determination to come to the defense of embattled allies without fear of their despotic foes. The more Biden does to “Trump-proof” U.S. support for Ukraine against the risk of losing in November, the more secure his legacy will be.

But the biggest win Biden will need will be domestic.

It won’t be his executive order all but banning asylum for migrants: That only confirmed that he had failed to use every option at his disposal to tackle the crisis. It won’t be low unemployment: No magic wand will erase 2022’s inflation or today’s high interest rates. It won’t be Trump’s legal travails, which seem to have galvanized his supporters at least as much as it has delighted his opponents.

And it won’t be finding a way to offload Kamala Harris from the ticket, easing the apprehension many voters have about a feeble president being succeeded by his unpopular and unconvincing vice president. Pushing out the first Black female vice president would alienate a lot of Democratic voters.

It all leaves the president with one option that can be a win for America and, ultimately, his place in history. He can still choose not to run, to cede the field to a Democrat who can win — paging Josh Shapiro or Gretchen Whitmer — and do the hard and brave things it will take to secure security and peace for the free world.

There’s still time, if only just. It would be a courageous, honorable and transformative legacy.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

Bret Stephens is an Opinion columnist for The Times, writing about foreign policy, domestic politics and cultural issues. Facebook

Putin's quick way to end war: 'Stop weapons supplies' to Ukraine. Live updates

Russian President Vladimir Putin mixed bravado with questionable claims and the possibility of peace talks Tuesday in a rare wide-ranging discussion with war correspondents and bloggers about the so-called “special military operation’’ in Ukraine.

Answering questions for more than two hours, Putin said Ukraine has sustained “catastrophic’’ losses during its nascent counteroffensive, such as 10 times more casualties than Russia and three times as many disabled battle tanks, 160 to 54.

German tanks and American infantry fighting vehicles “are burning really well,” he said, smirking.

Putin also suggested his forces might make another attempt at overtaking Kyiv after being pushed away from the Ukrainian capital in March 2022, the war’s second month.

“Should we come back there or not?” he said. “Only I could give an answer.”

The Russian leader accused the West of scuttling a peace deal the warring parties negotiated in March 2022, and said the fighting would end quickly if U.S. and NATO would only stop providing military assistance to Ukraine.

“If they want to see a negotiated solution to the conflict,’’ he said, “it’s enough for them to stop weapons supplies.”

Developments:

∎ Russia's overnight attacks also targeted Ukraine's two largest cities, Kyiv and Kharkiv. Kyiv officials said its air defenses repelled Moscow's missiles, but Kharkiv Mayor Ihor Terekhov said a drone strike damaged a utilities business and a warehouse in the city’s northeast.

∎ Small amounts of E. coli and cholera have been found in the floodwaters near the city of Kherson caused by the Kakhovka Dam disaster, along with fuel and other toxic chemicals, the Kyiv Independent reported .

∎ Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said Tuesday his country has already has received some of Russia’s tactical nuclear weapons and warned that he would use them if Belarus faced an act of aggression. Putin has said the nuclear weapons would be sent in July and remain under Russian control.

CIA warned Ukraine in June 2022 not to attack Nord Stream pipelines, report says

The CIA warned Ukraine in June 2022 not to sabotage the Nord Stream pipelines used to send Russian natural gas to Germany after getting a tip from a Dutch military intelligence agency, the Dutch public broadcasting organization NOS reported Tuesday.

Plans to blow up the pipelines were called off, NOS said, but three months later explosions rocked Nord Stream 1 and Nord Stream 2, spilling natural gas into international waters in the Baltic Sea where Sweden and Denmark have some commercial rights. A culprit has not been identified, and Ukraine has denied involvement.

NOS, which partnered with two German media outlets in conducting an investigation, said the Dutch agency − known as MIVD − learned of the planned attack from an unnamed Ukrainian source.

11 dead from missile strikes in Zelenskyy's hometown

Russia brought the war strikingly close to home for Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Tuesday, launching an overnight attack that killed 11 people and injured 36 in his native Kryvyi Rih, officials said.

The central Ukrainian city was the target of six cruise missiles that hit a five-story residential building and four other non-military targets, damaging dozens of other structures in the area, according to Oleksandr Vilkul , chairman of the City Defense Council. Vilkul said four of the victims died in the residential building and seven in a warehouse that stored water and other drinks.

"The civilized world must see the barbarism of the Russians,'' Gov. Serhiy Lysak of the Dnipropetrovsk province said in a posting with a video of him holding a news conference in front of a heavily damaged building. "We tell the (local) and world media the details of the bloody terrorist attack committed by the Kremlin against the civilians of the Ukrainian city.''

Dnipropetrovsk is among the regions grappling with last week's collapse of the Kakhovka Dam, which Ukraine blames on Russian forces.

"Russian killers continue their war against residential buildings, ordinary cities and people,'' Zelenskyy said in a Telegram post that included a video showing the residential building in flames and several charred cars nearby. "Terrorists will never be forgiven, and they will be held accountable for every missile they launch.''

On Monday, Putin denounced Ukraine for striking civilian targets in his country in a speech delivered less than four weeks after the United Nations issued a report saying at least 23,600 Ukrainian civilians had been killed or injured since Russia invaded its neighbor. 

$325 million US aid package to Ukraine includes defense missiles

The Pentagon announced a $325 million military aid package for Ukraine, the second announcement of weapons for the country in less than a week.

The new package includes anti-aircraft missiles to defend Ukraine against the regular barrages of missiles and drones from Russia, which launched its invasion in February 2022. Since then, the Biden administration has provided Ukraine with $40 billion in weapons, ammunition and training.

The Pentagon will also provide Ukraine 15 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicles and 10 Stryker armored personnel carriers to protect troops who have begun a long-awaited offensive against dug-in Russian troops in eastern and southern Ukraine.

Ukrainian troops will also receive 22 million rounds of small arms ammunition and grenades for the assault that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg told USA TODAY is expected to be difficult and bloody.

− Tom Vanden Brook

Biden, Stoltenberg support requiring 2% of GDP for NATO members

President Joe Biden said Tuesday that the U.S. will push for NATO member nations to spend at least 2% of their GDP on defense when the alliance meets next month in Vilnius, Lithuania. 

Biden's support for the initiative came during an Oval Office meeting with NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

"I expect allies to agree that 2% of GDP for defense has to be a minimum of what allies have to invest in our shared security," Stoltenberg said.

NATO allies will meet July 11-12 to discuss the future of the alliance and Russia's war against Ukraine.

− Francesca Chambers

NATO chief touts Ukrainian forces, warns of tough fight ahead

In an interview with USA TODAY, Stoltenberg noted the gains Ukraine has made in the early days of its counteroffensive, including reclaiming seven villages and small towns.

That progress points to the impact of the weapons and training the West has provided Kyiv's forces as they battle an enemy with a significant manpower advantage. Stoltenberg praised the courage and determination the Ukrainians have demonstrated over more than 15 months of war, but he warned of the tough road ahead against Russian troops that have dug in over a 600-mile front to defend territory the Kremlin has annexed.

"We need to be prepared that this offensive will be bloody and difficult," he said. "The Russians have had time to build − they're quite heavy defensive lines, and to breach them is a demanding task."

− Tom Vanden Brook and Francesca Chambers

Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant not in 'immediate danger' after dam breach

The water level of the reservoir that feeds the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant has been dropping steadily since last week's breach of the Kakhovka Dam, but that doesn't present an “immediate danger,” the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency said Tuesday.

IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi met with Zelenskyy in Kyiv before traveling to Zaporizhzhia to inspect the plant, which has been under Russian control since shortly after the war began in February 2022. Fighting near the facility has cut off power several times and required use of emergency diesel generators to cool the reactors, raising concerns about a nuclear accident .

The dam, further down the Dnieper River, helped keep water in a reservoir that cools the plant’s reactors.

“It is a serious situation because you are limited to the water you have there,” Grossi told reporters. “If there was a break in the gates that contain this water or anything like this, you would really lose all your cooling capacity.”

Contributing: The Associated Press