strategic cruise missile meaning

Advertisement

The Simple Difference Between Ballistic Missiles and Cruise Missiles

• Share Content on Facebook
• Share Content on LinkedIn
• Share Content on Flipboard
• Share Content on Reddit
• Share Content via Email

In 2017, North Korea unexpectedly staged a test launch of what was then a new ballistic missile , the Pukguksong-2. The launch took place when Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe was on a state visit to the United States . There have been many more test launches of ballistic missiles by North Korea since. Between May and October 2019, North Korea launched as many as 12 ballistic missiles or other projectiles. But they have all been just test launches.

Things got real, though, on Jan. 7, 2020, when Iran launched more than a dozen ballistic missiles at two Iraqi military bases housing U.S. troops. This was not a test launch. It was Iran's retaliation for the U.S. drone strike that killed Iran Gen. Qassem Soleimani on Jan. 3, 2020. There were no casualties and Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif defended the missile strike on the U.S. bases in Iraq, saying it was an act of "self-defense."

But for the non-military minded among us, these ballistic missile launches — both the constant test launches in North Korea and the intentional strikes on U.S. bases in Iraq — may raise a good question: What exactly is a ballistic missile, anyway? Is there something about the ballistic part that makes a missile even more dangerous? After all, when someone freaks out we say they've "gone ballistic."

According to the Federation of American Scientists , a ballistic missile is one that has a ballistic trajectory over most of its flight path. What that means is that once the missile burns up the fuel that propels it, the missile keeps moving, the same way that a bullet does after it's been fired out of a gun. Once the fuel is gone, the missile's direction can't be altered. It follows a path determined by the speed of its launch and the force of gravity trying to pull it back toward the Earth's surface. Eventually, gravity guides the missile — and its payload, which might be an explosive, a chemical or biological weapon, or a nuclear device — down toward its target.

Ballistic missiles are different than cruise missiles. Cruise missiles are self-propelled for the majority of their time in the air, flying in a relatively straight line and at lower altitudes thanks to a rocket propellant. Think of a ballistic missile's flight path as a large arc up and back down again, while that of a cruise missile — fired from a warship, for instance — is closer to a straight line.

Ballistic missiles first came into use during World War II, when the Germans used a ballistic missile called the V-2 to attack London. British air defenses designed to stop aircraft couldn't stop the V-2s, because the rockets traveled too high into the upper atmosphere and moved too fast.

After the war, the U.S., with the help of captured German technology and scientists, built its own arsenal of even more powerful intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) capable of unleashing nuclear destruction upon targets on the other side of the world. The Soviet Union and China built ICBMs as well, setting up a world where a nuclear war was deterred by the prospect of mutual assured destruction.

The North Korean regime successfully tested intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) in July and November 2017. Its Hwasong-15 ICBM reached an altitude of 2,780 miles (4,475 kilometers) and flew about 590 miles (1,000 kilometers) before landing in the sea off the coast of Japan. Analysts estimate the Hwasong-15 has a potential range of 8,100 miles (13,000 kilometers). If it's fired on a flatter trajectory, it could reach potentially reach anywhere on the U.S. mainland.

Which countries have intercontinental ballistic missiles?

What is meant by ballistic trajectory, what is difference between a ballistic and a cruise missile, how high do ballistic missiles fly, are ballistic missiles nuclear.

Please copy/paste the following text to properly cite this HowStuffWorks.com article:

• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar
• Skip to footer

Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation

April 27, 2017

Fact Sheet: Ballistic vs. Cruise Missiles

Ballistic missiles are powered initially by a rocket or series of rockets in stages, but then follow an unpowered trajectory that arches upwards before descending to reach its intended target. Ballistic missiles can carry either nuclear or conventional warheads.

There are four general classifications of ballistic missiles based on their range, or the maximum distance the missile can travel:

• Short-range: less than 1,000 kilometers (approximately 620 miles), also known as “tactical” ballistic missiles.
• Medium-range: between 1,000 and 3,000 kilometers (approximately 620-1,860 miles), also known as “theater” ballistic missiles.
• Intermediate-range: between 3,000 and 5,500 kilometers (approximately 1,860-3,410 miles)
• Long-range: more than 5,500 kilometers (approximately 3,410 miles), also known as intercontinental or strategic ballistic missiles. Intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) can fly much further than the minimum range; for example, Russia could hit Chicago with an ICBM launched from the Krasnoyarsk ICBM base, which is located 9,156 kilometers (5,689 miles) away.

Ballistic missiles have three stages of flight:

Boost Phase begins at launch and lasts until the rocket engine(s) stops firing and the missile begins unpowered flight. Depending on the missile, boost phase can last three to five minutes. Most of this phase takes place in the atmosphere.

Midcourse Phase begins after the rocket(s) stops firing. The missile continues to ascend toward the highest point in its trajectory, and then begins to descend toward Earth. This is the longest phase of a missile’s flight; for ICBMs, it can last around 20 minutes. During midcourse phase, ICBMs can travel around 24,000 kilometers per hour (15,000 miles per hour).

Terminal Phase begins when the detached warhead(s) reenter the Earth’s atmosphere and ends upon impact or detonation. During this phase, which can last for less than a minute, strategic warheads can be traveling at speeds greater than 3,200 kilometers per hour (1,988 miles per hour).

Cruise missiles remain within the atmosphere for the duration of their flight and can fly as low as a few meters off the ground. Flying low to the surface of the earth expends more fuel but makes a cruise missile very difficult to detect.

Cruise missiles are self-guided and use multiple methods to accurately deliver their payload, including terrain mapping, global positioning systems (GPS) and inertial guidance, which uses motion sensors and gyroscopes to keep the missile on a pre-programmed flight path. As advanced cruise missiles approach their target, remote operators can use a camera in the nose of the missile to see what the missile sees. This gives them the option to manually guide the missile to its target or to abort the strike.

To learn about missile defense, check out our fact sheet .

Sources: Department of Defense, Missile Defense Agency, Federation of American Scientists .

820 1st Street NE, Suite LL-180 Washington, D.C. 20002 Phone: 202.546.0795

The Missile Threat website brings together authoritative and up-to-date open source information and analysis about ballistic and cruise missiles around the globe and the systems designed to defend against them.  Missile Threat is a product of the Missile Defense Project at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), which looks at a wide range of policy, program, and strategic issues related to missile defense. Technological and geopolitical factors have driven increased global supply and demand for high-velocity, unmanned, missile-based weapons and their corresponding counters. Besides more recognized cruise and ballistic missile threats, global missile proliferation now consists of a spectrum including precision-guided rockets, anti-ship missiles, air defenses, hypersonic delivery systems, and counterspace weapons.

Within CSIS’ International Security Program and directed by Senior Fellow Thomas Karako, the project’s research considers the most pressing problems of the day, such as homeland missile defense, integrated air and missile defenses for U.S. forces and allies abroad, offensive strike capabilities, and investments in high technology to defeat missile threats through new and innovative means. The project also hosts a variety of events to shape the debate about policy, budgets, legislation, and both current and future programs.

Established in Washington, D.C. nearly 60 years ago, the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) is a bipartisan, nonprofit policy research organization dedicated to advancing practical ideas that address the world’s greatest challenges. To learn more about CSIS, visit www.CSIS.org

Email: [email protected] Media inquiries: [email protected] Twitter: @Missile_Defense

Missile Defense Team

• Thomas Karako , Project Director
• Shaan Shaikh , Deputy Director; Managing Editor, Missile Threat
• Wes Rumbaugh , Fellow
• Masao Dahlgren , Fellow
• Patrycja Bazylczyk , Program Coordinator & Research Assistant
• Ian Williams , Former Fellow, on IPA with the U.S. Department of Defense

Non-resident Affiliate Scholars:

• Archer Macy , Senior Associate
• Brian Green , Senior Associate
• Daniel Karbler, Senior Adviser
• Francis Mahon ,  Senior Associate
• Jon Hill , Senior Adviser
• Peppi DeBiaso , Senior Associate

George C. Marshall Missile Defense Project Advisory Board

The George C. Marshall Missile Defense Project looks at a wide range of policy, program, and strategic issues related to missile defense and missile proliferation. The project’s Advisory Board is composed of former government officers and military officials, as well as scholars and business leaders with a serious attention to these issues. The Board periodically meets in Washington D.C. to provide updates on the effort and discuss the direction of the project.

Ambassador J.D. Crouch

Rear Admiral (ret.) Tom Druggan

Ambassador Eric Edelman

Lieutenant General (ret.) Richard Formica

Mr. Brian Green

Mr. Kenneth Harmon

Mr. Todd Harrison

Dr. Peter Hays

Dr. Seth G. Jones ( Chair )

Ambassador Robert Joseph

Lieutenant General (ret.) Daniel Karbler

Mr. Tom Laliberty

Rear Admiral (ret.) Archer Macy

Brigadier General (ret.) Keith McNamara

Dr. Michael O’Hanlon

Dr. Keith Payne

Dr. Jana Robinson

Ms. Paige Rumberg

Dr. Kiron Skinner

Mr. Norm Tew

Brigadier General (ret.) Kenneth Todorov

Development and Design

This digital feature is a product of the  Andreas C. Dracopoulos iDeas Lab , the in-house digital, multimedia, and design agency at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

Produced by: Jonathan Choi, Tucker Harris, Jacque Schrag, Lindsay Urchyk

• 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)

New US nuclear chief takes fresh stance on sea-launched cruise missile

WASHINGTON — The new head of U.S. Strategic Command, which oversees the country’s nuclear arsenal, is taking a less forceful tone on developing the sea-launched cruise missile than his predecessor, who was an unabashed champion of the program.

Gen. Anthony Cotton neither endorsed nor repudiated the sea-launched cruise missile nuclear program, commonly called SLCM-N, in a February letter to Congress. The letter — entered into the congressional record during Cotton’s testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee last week — and the Biden administration’s proposed nuclear arsenal budget for fiscal 2024 lay the groundwork for another tussle with Congress over whether to proceed with SLCM-N.

“A low-yield, non-ballistic nuclear capability to deter, assure and respond without visible generation (similar to the characteristics of SLCM-N) offers additional options and supports an integrated deterrence approach,” Cotton wrote. “It is one of several possible nuclear or conventional capabilities the U.S. could develop to enhance strategic deterrence.

“I support funding to address the full range of possible options to address this challenge in a rapidly changing security environment with the backdrop of multiple adversaries.”

Congress authorized $25 million for continued SLCM-N research and development when it passed the FY23 National Defense Authorization Act in December. By contrast, the Biden administration’s FY24 budget request for the National Nuclear Security Administration does not include SLCM-N funding.

Proponents of SLCM-N in Congress heavily relied on Cotton’s predecessor, Adm. Charles Richard, to argue in favor of what they view as gaps in the United States’ low-yield, unobservable nuclear capabilities. In his own letter to Congress in June, Richard wrote that he supports SLCM-N despite the Biden administration’s attempts to cancel it , citing “the current situation in Ukraine and China’s nuclear trajectory.”

Richard retired when Cotton assumed leadership of Strategic Command in December.

“Cotton, who’s taking a more measured approach, is still open to it, but he’s not the adamant supporter that Richard was at all,” said Stephen Young, who lobbies for the Union of Concerned Scientists, a nuclear nonproliferation advocacy group. “He’s not wedded to that as the only possible way to fill that gap.”

Young noted that the W76-2 warhead equipped on submarine-launched ballistic missiles already provides the U.S. with a low-yield, unobservable capability — even if the country doesn’t have cruise missiles with those specific functions. Additionally, he argued that the U.S. is building the low-yield B61-12 gravity bomb that can launch from the new B-21 stealth bomber as a non-ballistic nuclear option.

“To me it’s a huge stretch to have to have all these things,” said Young, arguing that SLCM-N is “a nuclear warfighting tool that we don’t need” to achieve deterrence.

The proposed FY24 nuclear weapons budget also includes funding to maintain the B83 megaton gravity bomb , which is 80 to 100 times more powerful than the bomb dropped on Hiroshima, Japan, during World War II. The Biden administration wants to retire the B83, per its Nuclear Posture Review, but has yet to lay out a time frame to do so.

In the meantime, Congress used the FY23 defense authorization bill to prevent its retirement until the Pentagon identifies a replacement capability to strike hard and deeply buried targets.

“We are going to have to figure out how we are going to continue [with] what capabilities we have to go after [hard and deeply buried targets], whether conventional or nuclear,” Cotton told the Senate Armed Services Committee last week.

But Young argued that “there are very few scenarios where” the U.S. would want to strike hard and deeply buried targets using the B83 given the immense level of destruction that would ensue.

“If you want to hit the various facilities in North Korea and drop the larger bomb, you’ve got fallout — all of South Korea and Japan,” Young said.

Bryant Harris is the Congress reporter for Defense News. He has covered U.S. foreign policy, national security, international affairs and politics in Washington since 2014. He has also written for Foreign Policy, Al-Monitor, Al Jazeera English and IPS News.

More In Budget

Austin calls European allies, seeking more Patriots for Kyiv

The u.s. secretary of defense has held multiple one-on-one calls with european allies this week, during which he raised the topic..

Defense Innovation Unit moves to ease commercial drone certifications

Diu wants to improve its process for vetting commercial drones, with the goal of making it easier for companies to sell their systems to the u.s. military..

Saab unveils technology incubator using Enforcer 3 as test bed

“we are trying to get capability to the fleet in months,” said erik smith, the chief executive of saab's u.s. branch..

Lockheed to supply Australia with air battle management system

Overhauling australia’s overhead defenses is expected to generate hundreds of local jobs as well as open the door to a multibillion-dollar export market..

Defense Innovation Unit prepares to execute $800 million funding boost

Diu director doug beck said he doesn’t foresee any issues with quickly putting to work the $983 million in fy-24 funding congress provided in march., featured video, military times’ 2024 service members of the year.

From combat medic to Paralympian: What drives Ellie Marks?

The Navy petty officer ensuring the Carney stays focused on the fight

Ukraine-born airman’s translations aided allied efforts as war erupted

Trending now, sierra nevada wins $13b contract to build air force ‘doomsday plane’, france and germany sign off on future battle tank system, us army to field long-range combat aircraft to first unit in fy31, french missile double punch adds new naval capability for europe, lidar: another emerging technology brought to you by china.

• Publications

Cruise missile proliferation: Trends, strategic implications, and counterproliferation

Fabian Hoffmann | Policy Intern at the British American Security Information Council (BASIC)

This report seeks to inform public debate about the proliferation of cruise missiles and their strategic implications. It provides a detailed discussion of the technology behind cruise missiles, analyses how the proliferation of cruise missiles has proceeded and considers the strategic implications of cruise-missile proliferation on the European continent. The paper also outlines several policy recommendations intended to curtail the proliferation of cruise missiles and mitigate their adverse strategic consequences.

A proactive attitude is required in order to counter the negative strategic implications of cruise missile proliferation and to reverse the dangerous proliferation trends outlined in this report. Fabian Hoffmann

The report concludes that:

• Over the decades, dozens of cruise-missile systems have come into existence, using a large variety and blend of subsystems. This makes it difficult to provide a general definition of the term ‘cruise missile,’ a fact that may be particularly problematic in the context of potential arms control agreements.
• Several trends with regard to cruise-missile technology are discernible : for the near future, liquid-fuel turbojet and turbofan engines will likely remain the dominant propulsion systems used in cruise missiles. The increased adoption of solid-fuel ramjets is a possibility. Improved guidance, especially the large-scale adoption of two-way datalinks will allow cruise missiles to fly more complex missions, including swarm attacks. In addition, the increased adoption of multi-effect warheads will render cruise missiles more destructive.
• The proliferation of cruise missiles has progressed significantly. Today, dozens of states are in possession of advanced cruise-missile capabilities, including both anti-ship and land-attack cruise missiles. In addition, nuclear-capable cruise missiles have proliferated significantly, a trend that can be expected to continue in the future.
• The proliferation of cruise missiles has far-reaching strategic implications. While providing certain benefits, the proliferation of cruise missiles also comes with significant strategic drawbacks. Especially in a strained regional context, the proliferation of cruise missiles has the potential to undermine conventional and nuclear crisis stability.
• A proactive attitude is required in order to counter the negative strategic implications of cruise missile proliferation and to reverse the dangerous proliferation trends outlined in this report. In this regard, the international community should pursue a short-term agenda of establishing confidence and transparency-building measures surrounding the deployment and use of cruise missiles, while focusing on comprehensive and verifiable arms control agreements in the long-term.

Read the report

The opinions articulated above represent the views of the author(s), and do not necessarily reflect the position of the European Leadership Network or any of its members. The ELN’s aim is to encourage debates that will help develop Europe’s capacity to address the pressing foreign, defence, and security policy challenges of our time.

Image: Flickr, Kelly Michals

Related content

Missile control: it’s not rocket science

Missile proliferation is a growing international security concern. Governments and governmentally funded agencies are losing their monopoly on missile technologies. Action is needed. Dr Katarzyna Kubiak calls for global missile regulation and new arms control measures to avoid a new international arms race.

Controlling missiles in a post-INF world

Ground-launched cruise missiles are not the main military issue, as their effect on strategic stability remains limited. Greater problems will arise as soon as Russia and the US start the testing, production and deployment of intermediate-range ballistic missiles.

Europe and Trump’s Missile Defense Policy

Following the release of the Trump administration’s long-awaited Missile Defense Review, Dr Kubiak explores the role and scope of US missile defences and its impact on Russian and Chinese strategic retaliatory capabilities.

Sign up to newsletter

I would like to receive updates on:

• Euro-Atlantic Security
• Global Security
• European Defence

For further information about how we use this data, read our data and privacy policy .

• Election 2024
• Entertainment
• Newsletters
• Photography
• Personal Finance
• AP Investigations
• AP Buyline Personal Finance
• AP Buyline Shopping
• Press Releases
• Israel-Hamas War
• Russia-Ukraine War
• Global elections
• Asia Pacific
• Latin America
• Middle East
• Election Results
• Delegate Tracker
• AP & Elections
• Auto Racing
• 2024 Paris Olympic Games
• Movie reviews
• Book reviews
• Personal finance
• Financial Markets
• Business Highlights
• Financial wellness
• Artificial Intelligence
• Social Media

North Korea says it tested a cruise missile, flaunting new nuclear-capable weapon

A TV screen shows a report of North Korea’s cruise missiles with file footage during a news program at the Seoul Railway Station in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024. South Korea’s military says North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, adding to a provocative run of weapons demonstrations in the face of deepening nuclear tensions with the United States, South Korea and Japan. (AP Photo/Lee Jin-man)

South Korean army’s armored vehicles are seen during a military exercise in Paju, South Korea, near the border with North Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024. South Korea’s military says North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, adding to a provocative run of weapons demonstrations in the face of deepening nuclear tensions with the United States, South Korea and Japan. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

FILE - This photo shows the Arch of Reunification, a monument to symbolize the hope for eventual reunification of the two Koreas, in Pyongyang, North Korea, on Sept. 11, 2018. The monument appeared gone in satellite images taken by Planet Labs Tuesday morning, although it was unclear exactly when or how it was taken down, said NK News, a North Korea-focused news site. The Associated Press couldn’t immediately confirm the report independently. (AP Photo/Kin Cheung, File)

This satellite image from Planet Labs PBC appears to show the Pyongyang’s Monument to the Three Charters for National Reunification, which was also commonly called the Arch of Reunification, destroyed in Pyongyang, North Korea, Tuesday, Jan. 23, 2024. The monument appears to have been destroyed as tensions on the Korean Peninsula have increased in recent months and as North Korean leader Kim Jong Un called the monument an “eyesore.” (Planet Labs PBC via AP)

South Korean army soldiers pass by their armored vehicles during a military exercise in Paju, South Korea, near the border with North Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024. South Korea’s military says North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, adding to a provocative run of weapons demonstrations in the face of deepening nuclear tensions with the United States, South Korea and Japan. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

South Korean army soldiers move during a military exercise in Paju, South Korea, near the border with North Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024. South Korea’s military says North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, adding to a provocative run of weapons demonstrations in the face of deepening nuclear tensions with the United States, South Korea and Japan. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

South Korean army soldiers gather next to their armored vehicles during a military exercise in Paju, South Korea, near the border with North Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024. South Korea’s military says North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, adding to a provocative run of weapons demonstrations in the face of deepening nuclear tensions with the United States, South Korea and Japan. (AP Photo/Ahn Young-joon)

A TV screen shows a report of North Korea’s cruise missiles with file footage during a news program at the Seoul Railway Station in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024. South Korea’s military says North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, adding to a provocative run of weapons demonstrations in the face of deepening nuclear tensions with the United States, South Korea and Japan. The part of letters read “North, Cruise missiles.” (AP Photo/Lee Jin-man)

A TV screen shows a report of North Korea’s cruise missiles with file footage during a news program at the Seoul Railway Station in Seoul, South Korea, Wednesday, Jan. 24, 2024. South Korea’s military says North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast, adding to a provocative run of weapons demonstrations in the face of deepening nuclear tensions with the United States, South Korea and Japan. The letters read “South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, North Korea fired several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast.” (AP Photo/Lee Jin-man)

• Copy Link copied

SEOUL, South Korea (AP) — North Korea said Thursday it conducted its first flight test of a new cruise missile, as it expands its military capabilities in the face of deepening tensions with the United States and neighbors.

The report in state media came a day after South Korea’s military said it detected the North firing several cruise missiles into waters off its western coast. It didn’t immediately provide more details about the numbers of missiles fired or their flight characteristics.

The North’s official Korean Central News Agency said the Pulhwasal-3-31 missile is still in its development phase and that the launch did not pose a threat to neighbors. It described the missile as “strategic,” implying an intent to arm them with nuclear weapons.

Lee Sung Joon, spokesperson of South Korea’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the missiles flew a shorter distance than previous North Korean cruise missile launches, which he said suggested that the North was trying to improve the performance of existing systems.

The cruise missile launches were North Korea’s second known launch event of the year, following a Jan. 14 test-firing of the country’s first solid-fuel intermediate-range ballistic missile, which reflected its efforts to advance its lineup of weapons targeting U.S. military bases in Japan and Guam.

Yang Uk, an analyst at Seoul’s Asan Institute for Policy Studies, said North Korea is trying to highlight its diversifying arsenal of nuclear-capable weapons to increase pressure on rivals. But the recent displays of new weapons systems came amid a slowdown in tests of short-range ballistic missiles, which could indicate inventory shortages as North Korea continues its alleged arms transfers to Russia, Yang said.

U.S. and South Korean officials have accused North Korea of providing artillery shells, missiles and other supplies to Russia for its war in Ukraine, possibly in exchange for economic assistance and military technology.

Kim, who traveled to a Russian space launch center in September for a summit with Putin, has been taking aggressive steps to strengthen ties with Moscow as he tries to break out of isolation and join a united front against Washington.

Both Pyongyang and Moscow have denied that North Korea was sending weapons to Russia.

North Korea’s cruise missiles are among its growing arsenal of weapons aimed at overwhelming missile defenses in South Korea and Japan. They supplement the country’s huge lineup of ballistic missiles, including intercontinental ballistic missiles designed to reach the U.S. mainland.

While North Korean cruise missile activities aren’t directly banned under U.N. sanctions, experts say those weapons potentially pose a serious threat to South Korea and Japan. They are designed to be harder to detect by radar, and North Korea claims they are nuclear-capable and their range is up to 2,000 kilometers (1,242 miles), a distance that would include U.S. military bases in Japan.

Since 2021, North Korea has conducted at least 10 rounds of tests of what it described as long-range cruise missiles fired from both land and sea.

Tensions in the region have increased in recent months as Kim continues to accelerate his weapons development and make provocative threats of nuclear conflict with the United States and its Asian allies. In response, the United States, South Korea and Japan have been expanding their combined military exercises, which Kim condemns as invasion rehearsals and has used as a pretext to further ramp up his military demonstrations.

There are concerns that Kim could dial up pressure in an election year in the United States and South Korea.

South Korean experts and officials say Kim’s weapons drive has put further strain on a broken economy, crippled by decades of mismanagement and U.S.-led sanctions over his nuclear ambitions.

In a separate report, KCNA said Kim during a two-day ruling party meeting held through Wednesday criticized officials for failing to provide enough of “basic living necessities including condiments, foodstuff and consumption goods” to people living in the countryside and less developed cities and towns.

Kim called the meeting to discuss a 10-year project he announced last week to promote more balanced regional development, which includes a goal of building modern factories in every county nationwide.

Satellite images analyzed by The Associated Press this week suggest North Korea has torn down a huge arch in its capital that symbolized reconciliation with South Korea, a week after Kim dismissed decades of hopes for peaceful reunification with the war-divided peninsula’s south.

Kim last week described the Pyongyang monument as an “eyesore” and called for its removal while declaring that the North was abandoning long-standing goals of a peaceful unification with South Korea and ordered a rewriting of the North’s constitution to define the South as its most hostile foreign adversary. He accused South Korea of acting as “top-class stooges” of the Americans and repeated a threat that he would use his nukes to annihilate the South if provoked.

Analysts say North Korea could be aiming to diminish South Korea’s voice in the regional nuclear standoff and eventually force direct dealings with Washington as it looks to cement its nuclear status.

Follow AP’s Asia-Pacific coverage at https://apnews.com/hub/asia-pacific

• Air Transport
• Defense and Space
• Business Aviation
• Aircraft & Propulsion
• Connected Aerospace
• Emerging Technologies
• Manufacturing & Supply Chain
• Advanced Air Mobility
• Commercial Space
• Sustainability
• Interiors & Connectivity
• Airports & Networks
• Airlines & Lessors
• Safety, Ops & Regulation
• Maintenance & Training
• Supply Chain
• Workforce & Training
• Sensors & Electronic Warfare
• Missile Defense & Weapons
• Budget, Policy & Operations
• Airports, FBOs & Suppliers
• Flight Deck
• Marketplace
• Advertising
• Marketing Services
• Fleet, Data & APIs
• Research & Consulting
• Network and Route Planning

Market Sector

• AWIN - Premium
• AWIN - Aerospace and Defense
• AWIN - Business Aviation
• AWIN - Commercial Aviation
• Advanced Air Mobility Report - NEW!
• Aerospace Daily & Defense Report
• Aviation Daily
• The Weekly of Business Aviation
• Air Charter Guide
• Aviation Week Marketplace
• Route Exchange
• The Engine Yearbook
• Aircraft Bluebook
• Airportdata.com
• Airport Strategy and Marketing (ASM)
• CAPA – Centre for Aviation
• Fleet Discovery Civil
• Fleet Discovery Military
• Fleet & MRO Forecast
• MRO Prospector
• Air Transport World
• Aviation Week & Space Technology
• Aviation Week & Space Technology - Inside MRO
• Business & Commercial Aviation
• CAPA - Airline Leader
• Routes magazine
• Downloadable Reports
• Recent webinars
• MRO Americas
• MRO Australasia
• MRO Baltics & Eastern Europe Region
• MRO Latin America
• MRO Middle East
• Military Aviation Logistics and Maintenance Symposium (MALMS)
• Asia Aerospace Leadership Forum & MRO Asia-Pacific Awards
• A&D Mergers and Acquisitions
• A&D Programs
• A&D Manufacturing
• A&D Raw Materials
• A&D SupplyChain
• A&D SupplyChain Europe
• Aero-Engines Americas
• Aero-Engines Europe
• Aero-Engines Asia-Pacific
• Digital Transformation Summit
• Engine Leasing Trading & Finance Europe
• Engine Leasing, Trading & Finance Americas
• Routes Americas
• Routes Europe
• Routes World
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Airlines in Transition
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Americas
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Latin America & Caribbean
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Australia Pacific
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - Asia & Sustainability Awards
• CAPA Airline Leader Summit - World & Awards for Excellence
• GAD Americas
• A&D Mergers and Acquisitions Conference (ADMA)
• A&D Manufacturing Conference
• Aerospace Raw Materials & Manufacturers Supply Chain Conference (RMC)
• Aviation Week 20 Twenties
• Aviation Week Laureate Awards
• ATW Airline Awards
• Program Excellence Awards and Banquet
• CAPA Asia Aviation Summit & Awards for Excellence
• Content and Data Team
• Aviation Week & Space Technology 100-Year
• Subscriber Services
• Advertising, Marketing Services & List Rentals
• Content Sales
• PR & Communications
• Content Licensing and Reprints
• AWIN Access

North Korea Claims Firing Of New ‘Strategic Cruise Missile’

A Bulhwasal-3-31 cruise missile.

Subscription Required

North Korea Claims Firing Of New ‘Strategic Cruise Missile’ is published in Aerospace Daily & Defense Report , an Aviation Week Intelligence Network (AWIN) Market Briefing and is included with your AWIN membership.

Already a member of AWIN or subscribe to Aerospace Daily & Defense Report through your company? Login  with your existing email and password.

Not a member?  Learn how you can access the market intelligence and data you need to stay abreast of what's happening in the aerospace and defense community.

Related Content

Stay Connected. Stay Informed Grow Your Business.

North Korea says it tested submarine-launched strategic cruise missiles

North Korea said Monday it tested submarine-launched strategic cruise missiles the previous day, with leader Kim Jong Un observing the test and discussing issues related to the building of a nuclear-powered submarine, according to state-run media.

Kim guided the test-firings of "Pulhwasal-3-31" missiles together with senior navy and ruling Workers' Party of Korea officials Sunday morning, the state-run Korean Central News Agency said.

The move came after Pyongyang tested the new cruise missile, meaning "flaming arrow" in Korean and believed to be capable of carrying nuclear warheads, last Wednesday for the first time.

On Sunday, the cruise missiles flew above the Sea of Japan for 2 hours, 3 minutes and 41 seconds and 2 hours, 4 minutes and 5 seconds, respectively, before hitting an island target, the report said. The South Korean military detected the launches off the North Korean port city of Shinpo on the eastern coast around 8:00 a.m.

Kim "expressed great satisfaction" with the results, KCNA said, adding the test had no impact on the security of neighboring countries and nothing to do with the regional situation. The news agency did not provide details such as the launch site.

The leader stressed that giving the navy nuclear weapon capabilities is "urgent" for his country and set forth important steps toward "expanding the sphere of operation of the state nuclear deterrence in a diversified way," KCNA said.

As for the building of a nuclear-powered submarine and other new-type warships, Kim directed tasks to be completed and made conclusions on how to implement them, the news agency said without elaborating.

Related coverage:

N. Korea fires several cruise missiles from its east coast: S. Korea

North Korea fires cruise missiles into Yellow Sea: South Korea

North Korea claims it conducted underwater nuclear test in Sea of Japan

Jan 29, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

Delta to scrap connecting flight baggage checks in U.S. from Haneda

Apr 21, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

Japan grants special residency permit to Russian man opposing Putin

Apr 25, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

North Korea fires ballistic missile into waters outside Japan's EEZ

Apr 22, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

Ex-Japan PM Aso meets Trump in New York ahead of Nov. election

Apr 24, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

Japan watching case of Chinese prof. of Tokyo university missing in China

More from World

Kyodo News Digest: April 28, 2024

2 hours ago | KYODO NEWS

China to resume Taiwan-bound travel for Fujian Province residents

Apr 28, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

Japan, EU to boost economic security ties, reduce dependency on China

Kyodo News Digest: April 27, 2024

Apr 27, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

China's No. 4 leader meets Taiwan lawmakers, opposes independence

U.S. urges China to stop aiding Russia, agrees to keep exchanges

Kyodo News Digest: April 26, 2024

Apr 26, 2024 | KYODO NEWS

Philippines, France may begin talks on visiting forces deal in May

Subscribe to get daily news.

To have the latest news and stories delivered to your inbox, subscribe here. Simply enter your email address below and an email will be sent through which to complete your subscription.

* Something went wrong

Please check your inbox for a confirmation email.

If you wish to change your message, press 'Cancel' to go back and edit.

Thank you for reaching out to us. We will get back to you as soon as possible.

• Skip to main content
• Keyboard shortcuts for audio player

Middle East

What iran's military strategy can tell us about the war.

Scott Simon

NPR's Scott Simon speaks to Masoud Mostajabi, deputy director of the Middle East Programs at the Atlantic Council, about Iran's military strategy with its proxies in the region as well as Israel.

SCOTT SIMON, HOST:

Israel conducted missile strikes in Iran this week. Neither Iranian or Israeli officials have commented on the strikes, which appear to be in response to an Iranian attack last weekend when more than 300 missiles and drones were fired at Israel. And that attack was in retaliation for a deadly strike on the Iranian embassy in Damascus nearly three weeks ago. Iran claims it gave a 72-hour warning before its attack. Israel and allies managed to shoot down the missiles and drones, and Iranian media say that Israel's strikes were largely intercepted and did little damage. Where does that leave us now? Masoud Mostajabi is deputy director of Middle East programs at the Atlantic Council. Mr. Mostajabi, thanks for joining us.

MASOUD MOSTAJABI: Sincere thanks.

SIMON: The strikes in Iran were reportedly over near the city of Isfahan, targeting an air base and perhaps nearby nuclear enrichment site. Was the intent more to send a message than cause destruction?

MOSTAJABI: Thank you. I believe, yes. I think the Israelis wanted to communicate and signal to the Iranians, similarly as, I think, the Iranians had communicated the week prior with their set of attacks, that were carefully coordinated with both the United States in the weeks leading up to and the regional Arab countries - that we have the ability to follow through on an expanded set of attacks, if the escalation continues, if the need arises, that we have the ability to strike you. And I think similarly, the Israelis felt that this would signal to the Iranians, without necessarily increasing escalation, that they have the abilities to follow through on a bigger set of attacks inside Iran, are willing to hit inside the country, if the need arises.

SIMON: What has the response to the attack been among many Iranians?

MOSTAJABI: The Iranians, I think, in Tehran - their calculus has been that they would - you know, this is a set of deterrents. And so they feel like they would be able to establish a deterrence and have done so. The consideration in Tehran right now, I think, is whether they believe that this will be the full response from the Israelis or if there is more on the horizon.

I think what is really important here to mention is that we are all really hoping that cooler heads will prevail, as they have in the past. But given that Israel - Israeli entanglement in Gaza and in the north and Iran's, you know, new equation that the IRGC commander Hossein Salami defined, as well as the reality that both the Israeli and Iranian governments today have moved significantly more to the right, you know, I think is primarily an issue of concern. And the longer I think that this conflict continues to play out, the increased risk we have that a certain flashpoint may consume the broader region. And really, for Iran, they do not want to expand this conflict. Similarly, I think they've communicated this throughout the past six months, in particular with the United States.

SIMON: Iran reportedly deployed ballistic and cruise missiles as well as self-detonating drones. What does this say about and what do we know about Iran's military capabilities right now?

MOSTAJABI: Sure. I think at the heart of Iran's strategic deterrence and its set of capabilities are a number of items. Foremost is the ballistic missiles that we saw, the drones and cruise missiles that has developed in particular since 2017. These have been developed domestically over the past, as I mentioned, decade in particular.

SIMON: Meaning sanctions haven't prevented them from developing them.

MOSTAJABI: No. I think sanctions have actually reinforced the idea that they would have to be built domestically. And they've been very successful in, you know, creating these systems. They have a number of ballistic missiles, in particular, as I mentioned, and drones. And so this is one of the first and primary set of items that I think provide Iran a set of power projection.

And I think I should add, the other side of this - maybe less so sanctions related - is the military power of its partners across the region. Obviously we have Hezbollah, but all of these groups are very useful as a deterrent and arguably as a way to project this unconventional power that the - that is cultivated over the last decades through Tehran's supported largesse and influence across the region.

SIMON: Well, and we know that Iran and Lebanon's Hezbollah militia have a close relationship. To what extent does Iran's Revolutionary Guard - what control do they have over proxies in Iraq and Syria, where we should also note there were reports of strikes on Thursday?

MOSTAJABI: Right. So I think I'd like to mention that each group is actually quite unique in their relationship with their counterparts in Tehran. And I'd suggest it is much too oversimplified to claim that any one of them is a branch of the IRGC or the Houth force, its foreign expeditionary. Each has its own unique agenda, its own decision-making calculus, and really maintains an independence, despite obviously the influence and the support that it receives from Tehran.

The primary issue here is that much of this - there's a lot of strategic alignment between these groups and Tehran. And so they often find themselves to be, you know, in parallel in terms of their decision-making and what they are going to move ahead to do.

SIMON: Masoud Mostajabi is deputy director of Middle East programs at the Atlantic Council. Thanks so much for speaking with us today, sir.

MOSTAJABI: Thank you very much.

(SOUNDBITE OF MUSIC)

Copyright © 2024 NPR. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use and permissions pages at www.npr.org for further information.

NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.

Ukraine uses long-range ATACMS against Russia for the first time

The U.S. provided Ukraine with powerful long-range ballistic missiles for the first time earlier this month, and its military has already used them twice in the last week against Russian forces, according to three U.S. officials. 

The first strike was about 100 miles inside Crimea’s border on the morning of April 17, targeting a Russian military airfield, according to the officials. The Ukrainian military used the U.S.-provided Army Tactical Missile System, known as ATACMS, for the second time Tuesday night, targeting Russian forces east of the southeastern Ukrainian town of Berdyansk in Zaporizhzhia Oblast, officials said.

The Biden administration has not previously acknowledged sending ATACMS to Ukraine, but a National Security Council spokesperson confirmed that the U.S. has provided them. They were part of the $300 million military aid package unveiled March 12.

The NSC spokesperson said the administration did not reveal at the time that it was sending Ukraine the long-range missiles for operational security reasons. President Joe Biden directed his national security team to send the ATACMS to Ukraine secretly, the spokesperson said. 

The powerful missiles have a range up to 300 kilometers (about 187 miles) and allow Ukraine to strike the Russian military throughout Crimea and in occupied parts of eastern Ukraine that had been difficult to reach. The U.S.-provided ATACMS included both warheads with cluster munitions and with unitary blast fragmentation. 

The revelation that Ukraine has used the long-range ATACMS came as Biden signed into law a foreign aid package providing billions of dollars in weapons and support to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan. The measure, which will provide about $61 billion for Ukraine, was hung up for months due to opposition in the Republican-led House.

The Biden administration was already preparing a military aid package for Ukraine worth more than $1 billion, according to two U.S. officials familiar with the planning. It will include a range of equipment that the U.S. has already provided Ukraine, including ammunition, stinger missiles, artillery rounds, infantry fighting vehicles and other military equipment, the officials said.

NBC News was first to report in February that the Biden administration was planning to provide ATACMS to Ukraine. 

Late last year, the U.S. began to supply Ukraine with the missiles, but until now they had limited the shipments to older medium-range models amid concerns that taking the longer-range ones from U.S. stockpiles could endanger military readiness. In early February, the U.S. Army presented a plan to buy new ATACMS directly from industry and send ones in storage to Ukraine, and the Biden administration approved. 

The White House also concealed the decision to send the medium-range ATACMS in 2023, acknowledging it only after Ukraine used them in combat. Administration officials also cited operational security as the reason for its secrecy.

The Biden administration had resisted sending the long-range missiles over the past two years because officials worried Ukraine would use them to strike inside Crimea or Russia and prompt Russian President Vladimir Putin to escalate the conflict. White House and Pentagon officials have expressed similar concerns about other sophisticated weapons systems but have repeatedly decided to provide them to Ukraine.

But after multiple warnings to Russia not to use long-range weapons inside Ukraine and to stop attacking Ukrainian energy grids went unheeded, the White House decided to give Ukraine the same capabilities.

An NSC spokesperson said Biden directed his team to send the ATACMS after North Korea provided Russia with ballistic missiles that have now been used in Ukraine and after Russia has repeatedly attacked civilian infrastructure inside Ukraine.

The U.S. imposed limitations on the use of the long-range systems, including that they cannot be used to strike inside Russia and must be used within sovereign Ukrainian territory, which, according to the U.S. government, includes Crimea. 

Testifying before the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense last week, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin warned that without funding for more weapons to Ukraine, Russia is gaining the upper hand. 

"We’re seeing the Ukrainians be challenged in terms of holding the line — they’re doing a very good job, a credible job — but in order to continue to do that, they’re going to need the right materials, the right munitions, the weapons to be able to do that," Austin said.

An NSC spokesperson said more military aid will provide a boost to Ukraine on the battlefield, but it cannot turn the tide of the war alone. Ukraine is running low on munitions and equipment, while Russia continues to launch waves of drones and missiles, the spokesperson said.

Speaking on NBC News’ “Meet the Press” on Sunday , Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said the new aid will give the country a chance at “victory” as it  defends itself  from Russia.

“I think this support will really strengthen the armed forces, I pray, and we will have a chance at victory if Ukraine really gets the weapons system, which we need so much, which thousands of soldiers need so much,” he said.

Courtney Kube is a correspondent covering national security and the military for the NBC News Investigative Unit.

The Missiles That Could Give US Ally the Edge Over China

T he Philippines, a U.S. ally, has hailed as a "game-changer" the delivery of new supersonic missiles that it believes will significantly beef up its coastal defenses amid rising tensions with China.

The first batch of BrahMos cruise missiles , ordered from India two years ago, arrived at Clark International Airport north of Manila on Friday. It was handed over to the Philippine marines to be deployed at an as yet undisclosed location within the country's archipelagic territory.

The high-profile arms transfer comes in the middle of the simmering Philippines-China dispute in the contested Spratly Islands archipelago of the South China Sea, where the Chinese and Philippines coast guards have clashed over territorial features claimed by both sides .

Beijing cites historical rights to all of the sea's islands and reefs, claiming vast maritime zones in the process, while Manila lays claim to territories and traditional fishing grounds within its exclusive economic zone in an area it calls the West Philippine Sea.

The United States backs the Philippines in the maritime dispute and is treaty-bound to defend its oldest ally in Asia should allied service members come under an armed attack.

Jonathan Malaya, the Philippines deputy national security adviser, described the acquisition as a "significant game-changer," the ABS-CBN broadcaster quoted him as saying on Saturday.

Malaya said the system would be deployed once both parts—the missiles and the launchers—had arrived. But Malaya did not elaborate on the delivery schedule.

Manila ordered three batteries of the shore-based, anti-ship variant of the BrahMos cruise missile in a deal with New Delhi worth $375 million. The weapons system is otherwise highly versatile, capable of launching from land, air, sea or undersea against sea or ground targets.

The BrahMos missile is the product of a joint venture between India and Russia , with up to 85 percent of the hardware manufactured in the former.

The missile were delivered on the back of an Indian air force Boeing C-17 Globemaster III, images showed, and the fulfilment highlights India's role as a major arms manufacturer and exporter, at a time when it is also proving itself to be a net security provider amid turmoil in the Red Sea.

And although Beijing and Moscow have grown increasingly close in recent years as part of a joint challenge against the U.S.-led international order, India's latest weapons sale to " China's doorstep " appears to show one of the limitations of the friendship: the Kremlin is unlikely to veto an export at the expense of its historically close ties to New Delhi, even if the capability could give the Philippines an edge over China's forces.

China disapproved of the deal between India and the Philippines, an official suggested.

"The South China Sea issue is a matter between China and some ASEAN countries. China maintains that maritime disputes should be handled properly with countries directly concerned through negotiation and consultation," Liu Pengyu, a spokesperson for the Chinese Embassy in Washington, D.C., told Newsweek in an email.

"Certain non-regional country has sought to stir up trouble and incite confrontation in the South China Sea and jeopardize regional peace and stability. China has always opposed that," Liu said.

The Philippine armed forces, which last fall said it was considering more BrahMos orders, did not immediately respond to a written request for comment. India 's Defense and External Affairs ministries and Russia's Foreign Ministry did not respond to separate requests seeking comment.

Don McLain Gill, a geopolitical analyst and lecturer at De La Salle University in Manila, said the BrahMos cruise missile, with an effective range of 180 miles, was "widely known for not being able to be intercepted by any known weapon system."

"This adds an important and practical layer of deterrence for the Philippines amidst the latter's limited military resources vis-a-vis China," he told Newsweek .

"The supersonic cruise missile adds an important enhancement to the Philippines' ongoing roadmap of bolstering its coastal defense to more effectively exercise its sovereignty and sovereign rights in the West Philippine Sea at a time when China has been relentlessly pursuing its expansionist ambitions against international law," Gill said.

India joined the Missile Technology Control Regime in 2016. The multilateral tacit agreement restricts the export of missiles and rockets for payloads of 1,100 pounds for at least 185 miles, as well as their delivery systems.

Pooja Bhatt, an independent maritime security analyst based in New Delhi, told Newsweek : "With the South China Sea situation between China and the Philippines heating up, BrahMos missile adds to Manila's much-needed coastal defense."

"But more importantly, it's strategic signaling to Beijing that Manila has support from several countries , including India, on the South China Sea issue," Bhatt said.

Malaya, the Philippines National Security Council official, told local media over the weekend that the BrahMos missiles would complement the tracking capability offered by radar systems acquired from Japan.

Manila was "not preparing for war," he said.

Related Articles

• Japan Navy Helicopters Crash in Pacific
• Kim's North Korea Test New 'Super-Large Warhead' for Nuclear Missile
• China Building New Outpost on U.S. Doorstep, Leaked Documents Reveal
• China's iPhone-Making Dominance May Be Coming to an End

Start your unlimited Newsweek trial

• Subscribe Digital Print

• LDP funds scandal
• Latest News
• Deep Dive Podcast

Today's print edition

Home Delivery

• Crime & Legal
• Science & Health
• More sports
• CLIMATE CHANGE
• SUSTAINABILITY
• EARTH SCIENCE
• Food & Drink
• Style & Design
• TV & Streaming
• Entertainment news

North Korea tests new 'super-large warhead' and anti-ship missile

North Korea has conducted a test of a “super-large warhead” for its "strategic" cruise missiles as well as a test-firing of a new anti-aircraft missile, state-run media said Saturday, as Pyongyang continues to add new weapons to its growing arsenal.

“Through the test launch, a certain goal was attained,” it added without giving more details.

North Korea uses the term “strategic” to refer to weapons that are intended to carry nuclear warheads.

“Both tests were part of the regular activities of the administration and its affiliated defense science institutes for the rapid development of technologies in various aspects such as tactical and technical performance and operation of new-type weapon systems,” the KCNA report said, adding that they “had nothing to do with” the regional security situation.

Earlier this month, North Korea tested what it said was a new type of intermediate-range solid-fueled ballistic missile loaded with a newly developed hypersonic glide vehicle. While the launches of ballistic missiles have garnered headlines, the nuclear-armed country has also tested a number of new strategic cruise missiles and submarine-launched weapons since the beginning of the year.

Experts say cruise missiles present a unique danger in that they can fly low and maneuver, making them potentially very difficult to intercept by air and missile defenses. Unlike ballistic weapons, North Korea’s cruise missiles are not banned under United Nations sanctions imposed on Pyongyang.

In a time of both misinformation and too much information, quality journalism is more crucial than ever. By subscribing, you can help us get the story right.