NATO Missile Defense and the European Phased Adaptive Approach: The Implications of Burden-Sharing and the Underappreciated Role of the U.S. Army [open pdf - 3MB]
"The 2010 North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) decision to expand its ballistic missile defense program was somewhat surprising for several reasons, including lukewarm European public support for ballistic missile defense and tightening defense budgets on both sides of the Atlantic. Nevertheless, the Alliance has moved forward, with a significant expansion of its ballistic missile defense program, stating its intent to defend all European member state territory and populations, and declaring at the Chicago summit in 2012 that the Alliance had achieved an interim capability. The reasons for the Alliance decision in 2010 were several, but critical among them was the U.S. Government's offer to include the new European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA), announced by the Barack Obama administration in September 2009, as the centerpiece of the NATO ballistic missile defense program. For cash-strapped European members of the Alliance eager to influence NATO's ballistic missile defense efforts but unable to devote funds on par with the United States, Washington's proposal to include the EPAA framework in an expansion of the Alliance missile defense effort comprised an offer too attractive to refuse. […] However, few have actually contributed tangible ballistic missile defense assets to date in terms of missile interceptors, radars or other sensors, or ballistic missile defense-related platforms. Given differing threat perceptions and declining defense budgets, it seems very likely that tangible Alliance contributions, in the form of sensors and interceptors in particular, will remain minimal over the next decade."
Strategic Studies Institute of the U.S. Army War College: http://www.strategicstudiesinstitute.army.mil/