A new U.S. ballistic missile defence site in Redzikowo, Poland, known as “Aegis Ashore,” is now operational and available for the defence of NATO, according to a press release.

This site is a crucial part of a larger NATO missile shield, designed to detect, track, and intercept ballistic missiles in flight.

โ€œThis is an important step for transatlantic security and NATOโ€™s ability to defend against the growing threat of ballistic missiles,โ€ NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said, quoted in the news release.

โ€œBallistic missiles have been widely used in conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East. As a defensive Alliance, we cannot ignore that threat. Missile defence is an essential element for NATOโ€™s core task of collective defence,โ€ Mr. Stoltenberg added.

NATOโ€™s Ballistic Missile Defence system allows for the detection of missile attacks and uses radar data to guide an interceptor to destroy offensive ballistic missiles. The missile defence site in Poland is capable of defending against short-to-intermediate range ballistic missiles.

Aegis Ashore is a key component of NATOโ€™s Ballistic Missile Defence “Enhanced Operational Capability,” which was declared by Allied Heads of State and Government at the Washington Summit.

The mission of NATO Ballistic Missile Defence is to protect NATOโ€™s European populations, territory, and forces against the increasing threat posed by ballistic missiles. Key elements of NATOโ€™s missile shield include the two U.S. Aegis Ashore sites in Poland and Romania, U.S. Navy destroyers based out of Rota, Spain, and an early-warning radar in Kurecik, Tรผrkiye.

According to the press release, Aegis Ashore is purely defensive, and about 200 military personnel are stationed at the two interceptor sites in Poland and Romania. The site in Deveselu, Romania, has been operational since 2016.

Avatar photo
Lisa has a degree in Media & Communication from Glasgow Caledonian University and works with industry news, sifting through press releases in addition to moderating website comments.
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

11 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Paul
Paul (@guest_834252)
16 days ago

Add this to the existing AEGIS Ashore site in Romania, and the 4 (soon to be 5) Arleigh Burkes forward based in Rota, Spain for the US contribution to the Ballistic Missile Defense of Europe.

David
David (@guest_834360)
16 days ago
Reply to  Paul

It’s pretty shocking that the US has to forward deploy warships for this function as the combined European Nato members lack the ability to do so. No wonder Trump keeps having a bash.

Patrick C
Patrick C (@guest_835155)
13 days ago
Reply to  David

Aren’t a few european AEGIS ships getting SM-3? spanish and dutch iirc? maybe im thinking of something else…

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_834359)
16 days ago

This new Labour government need to get an AD System sorted out for this island of ours jolly quick ๐Ÿ™„ ๐Ÿ‡ฌ๐Ÿ‡ง

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_834417)
15 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Yes and there’re systems already to go even in the interim. It’d be good to get a article on UKDJ on the GBAD proposals from someone more in the know.

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_834482)
15 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Agreed ๐Ÿ‘

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_834552)
15 days ago
Reply to  Andrew D

Janes has recently mentioned a “UK GBAD Expo” held on the 11th July. Surely and hopefully something more concrete will come out of that!

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_834445)
15 days ago

Does the UK have any definitive, published plans to develop/deploy a GBAD capability for sovereign territory? Perhaps somewhat imprudent to continually rely upon presumed good fortune and the grace of God. There are probably only a limited number of miracles, such as the delivery of the BEF at Dunkirk, available. ๐Ÿค”๐Ÿ˜ณ

Paul T
Paul T (@guest_834606)
15 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

That was covered here on 05-07 with the ‘STORM’ article.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_834612)
15 days ago
Reply to  Paul T

Thanks, time to peruse the archives.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_834708)
15 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Damn, absolutely correct, even commented on article–must have had a bad night, and/or a cold, probably jet-lagged, shouldn’t have commented before/after 8 PM. ๐Ÿ™„๐Ÿ˜‰