Several U.S. legislators are working to provide more funds for the U.S.-Israeli Arrow missile program as fiscal 2003 missile defense legislation moves through Congress, according to reports yesterday (see GSN, March 8).

The House Armed Services Committee, which reported the fiscal 2003 National Defense Authorization Act out of committee Friday (see GSN, May 6), rejected a proposal to shift funds to the Arrow system during the bill’s markup.

Representative John Spratt (D-S.C.) had proposed an amendment to shift $135 million from three missile defense programs into other areas of the Missile Defense Agency budget, including moving $70 million from other missile defense programs to buy Arrow missiles.  The committee’s version of the bill would provide $21 million for research and development for the Arrow system but not for procuring missiles, Spratt said.

Despite defeat in committee, Spratt is considering offering the amendment when the bill goes to the House floor tomorrow, according to Defense Daily.

“These missiles are needed by the Israeli government,” Spratt said.  “Israel lives under constant threat of attack, and not only are these missiles needed, but funding them sends a clear signal to Israel’s enemies that we stand by her and will help her protect herself against missile attack” (Kerry Gildea, Defense Daily, May 6).

Senate Republicans Ready to Add $70 Million for Arrow

Meanwhile in the Senate, Republicans are also preparing to push for an additional $70 million to purchase Arrow missiles if the Senate Armed Services Committee does not add the funds to the $60 million that the MDA has requested for the system, Defense Daily reported.  The money would allow an increase in Arrow missile production by Boeing and Israel Aircraft Industries.

The Senate committee is expected to mark up the Senate version of the fiscal 2003 Defense Authorization Bill this week.  If the committee does not include the extra $70 million in the markup, some Senate Republicans plan to offer an amendment when the bill goes to the Senate floor.

Future U.S. Use?

The Arrow system is currently only designed for use in Israel, but some U.S. and Israeli officials have suggested the system could contribute to U.S. missile defenses (see GSN, March 15).

Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, MDA director, said in March that the Arrow might be incorporated into the U.S. defense system in the future.  Senator John Warner also said he would encourage the Pentagon to consider using the Arrow system, and Israeli Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer proposed expanding U.S.-Israel cooperative efforts on the Arrow program during meetings with U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in February (Kerry Gildea, Defense Daily II, May 6).

Spratt Would Shift Funds to PAC-3

Spratt’s proposal would cut $54 million from the space-based boost program, $25 million from the Space Based Laser program and $56 million from the sea-based boost phase program to provide the extra Arrow funds and $65 million more for the Patriot Advanced Capability-3 missile program.

“The administration requested a total of $7.8 billion for missile defense programs for 2003, both those programs in MDA and those elsewhere,” Spratt said.  “This amendment does not reduce the top line one dime.”

The extra money for the PAC-3 program would buy 24 additional PAC-3 missiles.  PAC-3 is the only system the United States will probably be able to deploy in the next five years to protect U.S. troops abroad, Spratt said (see GSN, May 6).

Spratt’s amendment would cut all funding for the space-based boost program, which he said has failed twice.  The program suffers from technical obstacles, is vulnerable to enemy anti-satellite capabilities and costs too much, he said.

The amendment would also cut $24.8 million from the space-based laser program but would provide $10 million for “concept definition work.”

“Once MDA has a game plan, they can come to Congress next year and seek funding for it,” Spratt said.  “The amendment cuts $24.8 million from the request to make sure they just do concept definition work before they being doing R&D work without a game plan Congress has reviewed and approved.”

Spratt said he recommends cutting $55.8 million from the requested $89.6 million for the sea-based boost phase program because the Navy has failed to show it can succeed in simpler ballistic missile defense programs (see GSN, March 28).

“Let’s see if the problems endemic to all Navy BMD programs can be overcome before we start making a big investment in a much more challenging program,” Spratt said (Gildea, Defense Daily).

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP

Back to top