Senate Democrats: Missile defense cash
is better spent on counter-terrorism
By Lisa Burgess,
Washington bureau
WASHINGTON — Senate Democrats revealed deep misgivings with the Bush
administration’s plans to move forward with a treaty-busting missile defense shield
Tuesday, despite indications from Russian President Vladimir Putin that Moscow might trade
arms reductions for its acceptance of the new weapons system.
The Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, which often sounded more like it was
taking place in a courtroom instead of the Senate’s traditionally collegiate
chambers, showed the growing gap between congressional Republicans, who support the Bush
administration’s efforts to deploy national missile defense, and Democrats, who are
concerned about criticism from allies and competitors alike.
Bush has made deploying a national missile defense system the centerpiece of his
defense strategy, and the Pentagon has asked for $8.3 billion for the system for 2002
— an increase of 57 percent over the previous year.
The Pentagon has spent more than $100 billion developing a missile defense program
since the 1970s. However, only two of four major tests of the "bullet hitting a
speeding bullet" science have succeeded.
On July 14, the missile defense program got a much-needed boost when a critical $100
million test — an exact repeat of last July’s failed effort — was a
success.
But earlier this month, before the test, the White House informed the international
community that the Pentagon could break ground in Shemya, Alaska, "within
months" for a new ballistic missile-launch test bed, an act that would violate the
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which the United States signed with the Soviet Union in
1972.
Bush claims the ABM treaty is not valid anymore because the Soviet Union no longer
exists. But Russian officials disagree, and Putin has warned that Russia will arm its
long-range nuclear missiles with multiple warheads if the United States ditches the ABM
treaty and deploys a shield.
The three Bush officials on hand to answer questions for the Senate committee were
Douglas Feith, undersecretary of defense for policy; John Bolton, undersecretary of state
for arms control and international security; and Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, director of the
Ballistic Missile Defense Organization.
The Bush officials repeatedly emphasized that the United States must act quickly to
build a missile shield, with or without international support.
"Yesterday, the president said: ‘Time is of the essence,’" Bolton
said. "If we can do it together, that would be great. If we can’t, we’ll do
it ourselves."
Republicans’ questions to the three-man panel were couched in praise for
Bush’s stance, and designed to showcase the threat of possible attack by North Korea,
Iran or Iraq.
Sen. Jesse Helms, R-N.C., voiced his support for the Bush administration, including
expressing his "amazement at the skepticism [about missile defense], given the
successful July 17 test and all the other success the program has had."
Democrats, however, asked the panel pointed questions about threats the intelligence
community repeatedly has said are more immediate, such as terrorism or biological warfare,
and criticized Bush’s "take it or leave it" position on breaking the ABM
treaty.
While saying he believed research on missile defense should go forward, Sen. John
Kerry, D-Mass., said potential adversaries would seek less expensive, technically simpler
means of attacking the United States, rather than employing long-range missiles.
"It is very hard to understand why a country like North Korea would purposely send
a missile, with a clearly obvious trail, when they have so many other options to enter
this country," Kerry said.
Sen. Robert Torricelli, D-N.J., criticized the Bush administration’s failure to
build on the Clinton administration’s plans to develop a missile defense program that
would not violate ABM requirements.
"I think [the Bush administration’s plans] could have been done with more
subtlety," Torricelli said.
Ironically, there are indications that Putin might solve the ABM treaty dilemma.
On July 22, during the last day of the Group of Eight summit of industrial nations in
Genoa, Italy, Bush and Putin agreed to discuss ways to reduce nuclear arsenals in both
countries while allowing the United States to build a missile defense shield.
Bush’s goal in such talks would be to extract promises from Russia that a U.S.
missile defense shield won’t trigger a new arms buildup. Putin, for his part, will
try to convince Bush to decrease the U.S. stockpile of nuclear weapons, which the
cash-starved Russian government can’t match.
On Wednesday, Bush’s national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, traveled to
Russia to begin setting up the framework for future arms control talks, Feith said.
Back to July stories
Page Two news roundup
Stories from June, 2001
Stories from May, 2001
Stories from April, 2001
Stories from March, 2001
Stories from February,2001
Stories from January, 2001
Stories from December, 2000
Stories from November, 2000
Stories from October, 2000
Stories from August and September, 2000
Stories from June and July, 2000
Home |
