U.S. Response I:  Budget Targets Overseas Terrorism, Proliferation

By Greg Seigle
Global Security Newswire

The fiscal 2003 budget released by White House officials yesterday requests record funding to oppose overseas terrorists groups and countries that pursue weapons of mass destruction, analysts said this morning.

The precise amount slated for the war on terrorism in the $2.13 trillion budget proposal is initially unclear due to the more than 40 agencies involved in the multifront war, a conflict so unpredictable the Defense Department seeks to have an extra $10 billion on hand for emergency operations.

It is virtually certain that overseas anti-terrorism and nonproliferation expenditures will reach unprecedented levels next fiscal year, more than $20 billion, analysts told Global Security Newswire.

For example, the State Department asks that more than one-fifth of its $24.3 billion budget — $5.2 billion — be specifically earmarked “for programs that are essential in pursuing the war on terrorism,” according to a White House budget release. The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA), which secures U.S. nuclear assets and attempts to convert Russia’s nuclear weapon complex to peaceful means, consumes $8 billion of the Energy Department’s $22 billion request, the release said.

“Everybody agrees there should be increases for the war on terrorism … but it seems [the Defense Department] and every other agency are trying to lump everything into homeland security or counter-terrorism in hopes this garners support,” said Steve Kosiak, director of budget studies for the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.

“It’s very confusing to determine what goes into counterterrorism and what goes elsewhere,” Kosiak continued. “I think there will be wide support for [counterterrorism and nonproliferation expenditures].  But there are going to be some concerns in Congress that every conceivable agency associated with the war on terrorism is trying to connect their programs with this.”

While many of the overseas expenditures requested by Bush administration officials are lumped in with homeland security (see related GSN story, today), several requests are slated solely for international counterterrorism and nonproliferation programs.

The White House budget proposal, which is often modified after going through rounds of budget conferences and mark-ups in Senate and House budget committees throughout the calendar year, seeks $3.5 billion for economic assistance, military equipment and training “for states on the front line in the war against terrorism,” according to a White House release, Winning the War on Terrorism Abroad. The countries considered to be on the front lines include Pakistan, India, Jordan, Oman, Israel and Columbia, a State Department official said.

White House officials want to give Jordan, strategically located along the borders of both Iraq and Syria, $198 million in military and $250 million in economic support, according to an Office of Management and Budget release.  “The money will be used to improve border controls targeting the flow of weapons, including weapons of mass destruction,” the release said.

“For Jordan, the military [assistance] is up, more than double what they go they got last year,” said Michael Vickers, director of strategic studies for the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments.  “It looks like Pakistan and Jordan come out the winners in this budget, and the relationship with India was already getting warmer.”

Pakistan and India, two nuclear powers that have threatened war against each other, have each requested $50 million for military aid — funds Bush administration officials want to offer in order to stave off a war and subdue terrorism in the region.

India has received sizeable financial aid in past years, but Pakistan is reaping the benefits of helping the United States topple the Taliban regime in neighboring Afghanistan, officials said.

“The Pakistanis have asked for similar support, and that support for Pakistan would be aircraft support and spares … and nuclear, chemical and biological-type equipment for the individual soldier,” said U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Curt Struble.

The State Department’s foreign military financing account, which already planned an annual $60 million hike for Israel, asks to send $457 million to Tel Aviv to combat terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction, according to Struble.

Colombia is slated to receive up to $98 million, much of it to fight its war with insurgents and to protect an oil pipeline that has been attacked hundreds of times the past year, keeping it out of service for 244 days and draining the already sagging Colombian economy, Struble said.

Russia is also expected to benefit from the record amounts of funds Bush administration officials want to pour overseas. While much of the $8 billion slated for the NNSA is earmarked for the maintenance and safety of U.S. nuclear assets, there are significant jumps in the funding for U.S. nonproliferation programs in Russia.

The budget request calls for more than $800 million for programs working with Russia and other former Soviet states to ensure control over weapons of mass destruction, secure nuclear weapon-usable materials, protect scientific expertise, facilitate downsizing of the Russian nuclear weapons complex and dispose of materials from retired nuclear weapons. These requests include:

*         $416 million for the Defense Department’s Cooperative Threat Reduction program (CTR), which assists Russia in dismantling strategic delivery vehicles and in protecting nuclear warheads, plus biological and chemical weapon security and disposal.

*         $233 million for the NNSA’s nuclear material protection, control, and accounting program, which aims to secure over 600 tons of Russian weapon-usable nuclear materials.

*         $39 million for the two NNSA programs designed to convert many Russian nuclear facilities into civilian commercial ventures.  The goal is to downsize the nuclear weapons complex while also providing jobs for displaced workers, particularly scientists, laboratory technicians and other skilled factory workers.

*         $49 million for efforts to close and convert Russia's three remaining plutonium production reactors.

*         $34 million to facilitate Russian disposal of its excess weapons plutonium.

“This is a dramatic and welcome change from last year's budget,” said Kenneth Luongo, executive director of the Russian-American Nuclear Security Advisory Council.

The funding for the CTR and NNSA “signals solid support for keeping nuclear weapons, materials, technologies, and expertise from falling into the wrong hands,” Luongo said.  “While some of the programs are funded below last year's final appropriation, overall the 2003 budget shows a new commitment by the Bush Administration to cooperative threat reduction activities.”

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Bush Requests Unprecedented Budget Increase for Homeland Defense

By David Ruppe
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — In the first presidential budget after the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush administration asked Congress yesterday for an unprecedented increase, to a record level, in spending on homeland defense.

U.S. President George W. Bush called in his annual budget to Congress for a nearly 100 percent increase next year in federal spending related to defending the homeland against terrorism, up to a total of $37.7 billion for fiscal 2003, according to budget calculations.

It reflects “an unprecedented commitment to securing our homeland,” Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge said at a briefing yesterday.

The most significant increases would be for upgrading airport security, bioterrorism defense, military force protection and law enforcement and intelligence capabilities.

The homeland defense request represents an $18 billion increase over the nearly $20 billion fiscal 2002 budget that was prepared before the Sept. 11 attacks.

After the attacks, Congress dedicated an additional $10.6 billion in additional funding to homeland security this fiscal year.

Even more increases will be made to the budget in coming years, as the administration’s homeland defense strategy is further developed, the document issued by the White House Office of Management and Budget said.  The budget called the 2003 figure “a down payment” on a larger set of homeland security initiatives being developed by Ridge’s office.

New Priorities

The overall increase, along with an overlapping $45 million defense budget raise, also reflects a major shifting by the Bush administration of federal budget priorities that includes significantly decreasing some social spending and further cutting tax revenues — which increases deficit spending, but which the administration says will help drive an economic recovery.

“We are at war, and we must pay the price to fight a war,” the budget document said.

“Homeland security is a challenge of monumental scale and complexity. It will not be cheap, easy or quick,” it said.

National security analysts are generally applauding the homeland defense budget increases.

“I think in terms of the funding it’s sufficient. It’s quite a lot of money, if you look at it,” said Kim Holmes, the Heritage Foundation's principal spokesman on defense policy issues.  “I like the way that the administration has balanced the needs of homeland security against the need to make some cuts in other areas.”

Some approval, however, was more cautious.  “I think the homeland security budget is right on target,” said Lawrence Korb, director of national security studies and a former Reagan defense official.  He would, however, have preferred more money for the Coast Guard and opposes the tax cuts.

“If we’re at war and they’re really serious about it you shouldn’t be cutting taxes,” Korb said, arguing the strategy causes economic pain in the wrong area.

“People put an American flag on their SUV and they think they’re part of the war effort,” he said.

Four Priorities

The budget is intended to address four immediate priorities with roughly $21 billion.

They include ensuring that state and local firefighters, police and rescue workers are prepared for terrorism; enhancing defenses against biological attacks; improving border security; and sharing information and using information technology to secure the country.

“They were chosen, first of all, because as of Sept. 11 and the anthrax crimes and challenges thereafter, they seemed to be those necessary to fill this country and communities' initial needs,” Ridge said.

The largest share of that money, approximately $10.6 billion, was budgeted for improving border security, including an increase of $282 million to $2.9 billion for various Coast Guard missions.

“I would like to have seen them double [Coast Guard funding],” Korb said.

The money would also go for improving border traffic checks, funding Defense Department and National Guard patrols of the skies and improving the visa and passport checking system, according to the budget.

Another large portion, $3.5 billion, will go to the first responders. “States are going to be full partners in homeland defense,” said OMB Director Mitch Daniels, also briefing reporters yesterday.

The funds would be used to buy equipment for personal protection, medical supplies, weapons of mass destruction detection technology, communications technology and other equipment, as well as training.

He said federal scrutiny is necessary to ensure the money is properly used.

“I really think the biggest issues we're going to face will be [state and local authorities’] speed in being able to absorb these funds.  I think we're going to have to be very careful that we don't simply shower the states with money that can't be productively used when it arrives.  And this would be particularly problematic at a time when a lot of states are strapped and might be tempted to use it for things that don't make Americans any safer,” said Daniels.

Bioterrorism defense spending would increase to $5.9 billion in fiscal 2003, a further increase to the $1.4 billion increase approved for this year (see GSN, Feb. 4).

Lastly, the administration is proposing $722 million for improving information sharing about possible terrorism and terrorists between federal, state, and local authorities.

Other Budget Priorities

The remaining $17 billion, according to the budget document, would be largely directed toward strengthening civil aviation security, military anti-terrorism activities and an expansion of law enforcement resources — at the FBI and other law enforcement and intelligence agencies.

Much of the requested $4.8 billion request for aviation security would fund the hiring of approximately 30,000 new federal airport security workers to check passenger identities and inspect baggage.

It also would be used for purchasing explosive-detection technology in baggage and other measures for improving passenger safety and for a nonsecurity function: “to facilitate air travel,” according to the budget.

The Pentagon and the intelligence community would receive $7.8 billion for anti-terrorism activities. The largest portion, $4.6 billion, would be used to improve the physical security of military facilities and personnel inside the United States.  Another $1.3 billion would be used for maintaining combat air patrols over U.S. airspace, the budget said.

Significant funding would also be directed for research and development related to combating terrorism, as well as for several specialized federal response teams such as the National Guard’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (see GSN, Jan. 30).

On the law enforcement end, more than 300 new FBI agents and other investigative and surveillance staff would be hired, as would 15 additional investigators for tracking terrorist money and 150 FBI agents and investigative staff for protecting so-called critical infrastructure elements including banking, finance, energy, transportation and computer infrastructure from disruption by terrorists, according to the budget.

Guns Over Butter

The administration’s sizable budget increases for the homeland defense budget and the military reflect a significant shift in spending priorities across the federal budget, including tax cuts, in the name of combating terrorism.

The budget proposal argues for sacrificing spending on many social programs, while increasing defense spending and further cutting taxes beyond the tax cuts approved by Congress last year.

The budget would reduce funding, when accounting for inflation, for the departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Education, the Interior, Justice and Labor, and the Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, NASA, the Small Business Administration, and the General Services Administration. It would also cause an estimated $80 billion in deficit spending, according to Daniels.

Spending for both guns and butter during the Vietnam era, the OMB budget said, led to inflation that lasted “almost two decades and contributed to four recessions.”

Instead, the budget lauded President Franklin Roosevelt’s WWII choices:

“As war approached, he husbanded the resources of the nation — and concentrated them upon the nation’s supreme priority: victory.  In fact, President Roosevelt’s 1944 Budget noted that expenditures not related to the war effort were reduced by more than 20 percent between 1939 and 1942.

Roosevelt’s vision, the budget said, “prepared the way for almost a quarter-century of robust growth in the United States and throughout the world. We can show ourselves worthy of that accomplishment by following that example.”

 “It’s an effort driven by OMB Director Mitch Daniels if anything,” according to Holmes at the Heritage Foundation. “He’s talking about the homeland security budget in a global sense.  How do you compare what we spend on national defense with what we spend on homeland defense and what we should or should not be spending in other areas.”

“In the first years of World War II, FDR dismantled a lot of the New Deal programs on the domestic side in order to pay for the war effort,” Holmes said.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, at his own briefing yesterday, defended the new approach.

“We're faced with a situation today where I believe the American people … will fully understand the fact that the president of the United States has made a decision that the priority should be homeland security and the capability of our country to contribute to peace and stability in the world.  And that that means that necessarily there is a relatively low rate of growth in federal spending in the nonhomeland security and the nondefense areas.  And I think that the American people will recognize the wisdom of that, and I think the Congress will recognize the wisdom of that.”

Korb, critical of the increased defense budget, calls the FDR analogy nonsense. “We had a very small military before that and were facing global superpowers. Germany had the third largest GNP in the world,” he said.

Today’s terrorism challenge is “not a military struggle. You were not going to defeat the Germans and the Japanese by arresting people and closing down their bank accounts or anything,” he said.

Back to top

Iraq:  Baghdad Calls for U.N. Talks

In a possible attempt to create a political climate in which the United States would find it more difficult to attack Iraq, Baghdad has told U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan that it is prepared for unconditional talks with the United Nations, according to a U.N. statement yesterday.  In a message delivered to Annan by Arab League Secretary General Amre Mahmoud Moussa, Iraqi President Saddam Hussein offered to participate in a dialogue.

The statement said Annan would schedule a meeting with an Iraqi delegation to discuss U.N. Security Council resolutions affecting Iraq (see GSN, Dec. 21, 2001).  Officials said the U.N. response indicates that Annan would not rush into broad discussions with Iraq, the New York Times reported.  If Annan agrees to hold talks, he would focus on returning weapons inspectors to Iraq, the officials said (Schmemann/Tyler, New York Times, Feb. 5).

U.N. Security Council resolutions require weapons inspectors to prove that Iraq is not pursuing weapons of mass destruction, but Iraq has barred inspectors since the United Nations evacuated them in late 1998 (see GSN, Jan. 14).

Earlier U.N.-Iraqi talks ended a year ago when Iraq demanded certain conditions for negotiations, including an end to sanctions that the United Nations has imposed since Iraq invaded Kuwait in 1990 (BBC News online, Feb. 5).

The council has promised to consider suspending sanctions for renewable 120-day periods if Iraq allows inspectors to return and they verify that Iraq has been cooperative.

Iraq asked the European Union last week for discussions regarding sanctions and other issues, but the European Union deferred to the United Nations.

Iraq recently allowed an International Atomic Energy Agency team (see GSN, Jan. 31) to conduct a regular visit to a nuclear research center (Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Feb. 5).

Is It a Ploy?

Iraq’s offer to hold talks without preconditions comes in the wake of international speculation that the United States might attack Iraq (see GSN, Jan. 31).  Concerns intensified after U.S. President George W. Bush said last week that Iraq is part of an “axis of evil” (see GSN, Feb. 4) that threatens world security and pursues weapons of mass destruction (BBC, Feb. 5).

Some U.N. diplomats said the offer could be an Iraqi attempt to persuade countries to oppose a U.S. attack, noting that Hussein offered to participate in discussions a year ago when the United Nations was considering sanctions.

Richard Butler, former head of the U.N. Special Commission on Iraq, said Iraq has made similar offers before.

“The difficulty it raises for us is we can expect a considerable number of countries, including in Western Europe, will say the U.S. should take this proposal seriously, and should get into talks with Iraq rather than take military action,” Butler said.

“If such talks were to take place,” he added, “the absolutely critical issue would be the resumption of arms control inspections, and I would expect the United States and others to feel obliged to insist that any inspections be real and not illusory.”

Iraq Criticizes Russia and Threatens the United States

Meanwhile, Iraqi Vice President Taha Yasin Ramadan said the Russian Foreign Ministry had cooperated with the United States to consider new sanctions against Iraq.  If the United Nations imposes proposed sanctions on Iraq, Ramadan said, “Russian businessmen will be the first to be affected.”

The United States would face “dreadful” consequences worse than Sept. 11 if it continues policies that “trample whole nations” and “interfere in domestic affairs of other countries,” he said during an interview with the Russian newspaper Vremya Novostei (Schmemann/Tyler, New York Times, Feb. 5).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Russia Might Back Down on Request for Formal Treaty

Russia might accept a protocol on nuclear arms reductions with the United States and end demands that the two countries sign a treaty, according to a diplomatic source cited yesterday by Russian news agencies.  Russian and U.S. Presidents Vladimir Putin and George W. Bush could agree on a protocol during Bush’s visit to Russia in May, the source said (see GSN, Feb. 1).

Russia has requested a legally binding document guaranteeing that the two countries would cut nuclear warheads to between 1,700 and 2,200 during the next 10 years, but the United States has said it prefers an informal agreement (see GSN, Jan. 31).

Another point of disagreement between the two countries has been whether they would keep decommissioned warheads in storage or destroy them (see GSN, Jan. 10).  The United States has said it planned to keep warheads in reserve.  During U.S.-Russia talks in late January, however, Russia said it wants both sides to implement irreversible cuts (Agence France-Presse, Feb. 4).

Meanwhile, Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Kasyanov said yesterday that Bush hopes to sign an accord during his visit to Russia, Russia’s RTR television reported.

“We talked in detail about what has been done with regard to disarmament since the November summit, so that … the next meeting of the two presidents in May has concrete content,” Kasyanov said after meeting with Bush (see GSN, Nov. 16, 2001).

“In this respect, President Bush hopes that during the summit an agreement can be signed,” he said (Agence France-Presse, Feb. 4).

Back to top

U.S. Response:  CDC Receives Small Portion of Biodefense Budget

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention will receive only a small portion of the $6 billion U.S. President George W. Bush has earmarked for bioterrorism defense in his fiscal 2003 budget proposal, the Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported today (see GSN, Feb. 4).

The Bush administration has proposed $1.6 billion in biological defense funding for the CDC, a slight increase from the current year, according to the Journal-Constitution.

“The increase in our bioterrorism line item … is very important and long overdue, even though the vast majority of it will go to support state and local health departments,” said CDC Director Jeffrey Koplan.

The total proposed budget for the CDC, however, would reduce the organization’s funds by about 15 percent from this year’s level, the Journal-Constitution reported.  Some of the difference comes from one-time funding allocations last year, such as $750 million used to purchase smallpox vaccine (M.A.J. McKenna, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Feb. 5).

The CDC’s proposed budget for all other programs, excluding biological defense spending, would reduce funds by $340 million, from $4.4 billion last year to $4.1 billion, according to the New York Times.

“To be perfectly candid with you, we had to make some tough decisions,” said Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson.

Research is Considered a Better Investment

The National Institutes of Health will see its funding increased by $4 billion in the budget proposal.  Such an increase would put the organization’s total budget at $27.4 billion, according to the Times.  The National Institutes on Allergy and Infectious Diseases would get $1.5 billion for bioterrorism research.

The NIH increase may be due to the Bush administration’s belief that NIH research programs provide U.S. taxpayers with a high rate of return on their investments, said Mark McClellan, a member of Bush’s Council of Economic Advisors (Sheryl Gay Stolberg, New York Times, Feb. 5).

Improvement Plan Takes a Hit

The CDC’s plans to upgrade and improve its facilities have been hit hard by the budget proposal.  Previously, the CDC had launched a 10-year improvement plan that would cost $140 million in beginning years, according to the Journal-Constitution.  Congressional efforts helped increase the plan to a five-year, $250 million-per-year plan this year (see GSN, Dec. 12, 2001).

In the fiscal 2003 budget proposal, however, the CDC has only been allocated $164 million for improving facilities.  About $74 million of that funding is set aside not for the main CDC facilities in Atlanta, but for a new laboratory in Fort Collins, Colo., the Journal-Constitution reported.

“Overall, I’m supportive of the president’s efforts to hold down out-of-control federal spending and eliminate pork-barrel projects, but I will strongly oppose any effort to shortchange needed funding for the CDC,” said U.S. Representative Bob Barr (R-Ga.).

“It is at the heart of the most important function of the federal government — protecting the American people — and it deserves our full support,” he said (McKenna, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Feb. 5).

The proposed CDC budget also reduces chronic disease and prevention programs by $57 million and infectious disease control $10 million, the Times reported.  Funding remains at current levels for programs such as child immunization, environmental health and sexually transmitted diseases.

Some public health officials said biological defense funding should not come at the expense of other public health programs.

“We will be very concerned if we are funding one thing at the expense of another,” said Georges Benjamin, president of the Association of State and Territorial Health Officials.  “If you really want to push people towards better health, you have got to keep these programs in place” (Stolberg, New York Times, Feb. 5).

Back to top

United States:  Fiscal 2003 Budget Proposal Increases Disposal Funding

The Bush administration’s fiscal 2003 budget proposal increases funding for the disposal of chemical weapons by $393 million, according to budget documents released yesterday.

The proposed chemical weapons destruction budget would allocate $974 million for research, $213 million for operations and management and $302 million for procurement, such as constructing new chemical weapons disposal facilities (U.S. Defense Department release, Feb. 4).

Construction began yesterday on a chemical weapons disposal facility at Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, in an accelerated plan to destroy more than 1,600 tons of mustard gas stored there (see GSN, Jan. 10).

Two weeks later than expected, U.S. Defense Department officials last week approved construction of a facility that will be smaller than originally planned, according to the Baltimore Sun.  Even with the delay, officials said they could still finish destroying the gas by the end of the year, three years sooner than originally planned.

“I’m confident we’ll be able [to] finish in December,” said Kevin Flamm, project manager for alternative technologies and approaches at Aberdeen’s Office of the Project Manager for Chemical Demilitarization (Lane Harvey Brown, Baltimore Sun, Feb. 4).

Back to top

Russia:  Canada Offers More Funding for CW Destruction

Canada has offered Russia additional funds for constructing a destruction facility at the Shchuchye chemical weapons site in Russia, the ITAR-Tass Russian news agency reported today (see GSN, Feb. 4).  Canadian Foreign Minister Bill Graham and Russian Chairman of the State Commission on Chemical Disarmament Sergei Kiriyenko agreed to the aid during a meeting yesterday.

A Canadian delegation is expected to visit Russia and sign an agreement on Feb. 15, Kiriyenko said.  The agreement would increase Canadian aid from the $300,000 it provided for the Russian chemical weapons destruction program last year (ITAR-Tass/BBC Monitoring/European Internet Network, Feb. 5).

Meanwhile, the Novye Izvestia Russian newspaper reported that some experts have concerns about the technology used for reprocessing chemical weapons at the Shchuchye facility.

“The thing is that we can reprocess chemical agents efficiently, and correspondingly, safely, only in flasks,” said Lev Fedorov, president of the Union of Chemical Safety.

Federov said more time is needed to develop industrial-scale methods to destroy the weapons.

“In bygone days, similar technologies were without fail processed at a semi-industrial installation,” he said.  “Operational development, even with the best concatenation of circumstances, would require a year in the least. ... Most probably, in this case the technical and, correspondingly, economic aspects of the matter are simply not taken into account.”

Novye Izvestia suggested that the project’s primary goal is to have a bureaucratically quick solution in time for U.S. President George W. Bush’s visit to Russia in May (see GSN, Feb. 1).  It is possible the Shchuchye facility might never begin operating, but the money Kiriyenko has gathered from foreign contributors has added to his political capital nonetheless, the paper said (Dmitry Frolov, Novye Izvestia/Defense and Security, Feb. 4).

Back to top

Japan:  Reentry Vehicle Test Fails

Japan has lost contact with a probe that it launched into space yesterday to test reentry technology for future manned flights.

Engineers launched an H2-A rocket and successfully placed a larger research probe into space, but they lost contact with a smaller probe and could not confirm that it reached orbit (see GSN, Feb. 4).  Technicians were trying to determine what happened, the Associated Press reported.

The rocket was supposed to deploy the smaller DASH probe over the Pacific Ocean south of the equator.  The probe then would have circled Earth for three days before falling into the Sahara Desert to test reentry technology.

Japanese officials said they would continued to plan 11 more H2-A satellite launch missions, which are to carry Japanese government payloads.

“I’m very happy.  I hope this launch will be the start of a succession of successful launches,” said Tsukasa Mito, executive director at Japan’s National Space Development Agency.

Placing a payload in orbit is an important test of Japan’s ability to compete with the United States and Europe in the satellite launching business, according to the Associated Press.

“If you can’t get a satellite in orbit, it doesn’t count,” said space analyst Joan Johnson-Freese of the Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies (Hans Greimel, Associated Press/Yahoo.com, Feb. 4).

Back to top

U.S. Plans:  MDA Proposed Budget Reduced, Overall Budget Increases

Although the proposed fiscal 2003 budget for the U.S. Missile Defense Agency is slightly reduced from current funding, overall missile defense spending would increase by $487 million to $9.18 billion in the proposal, according to a Center for Defense Information report released yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 11).

The fiscal 2003 missile defense budget proposal includes:

*         $1.1 billion for the ballistic missile defense system, up from $808 million;

*         $797 million for boost segment systems, up from $600 million;

*         $3.2 billion for midcourse segment systems, down from $3.8 billion;

*         $170 million for terminal segment systems, down from $200 million;

*         $373 million for sensor development, up from $335 million;

*         $122 million for technology development, down from $139 million;

*         $73 million for the Joint Theater Air Missile Defense Organization, up from $27 million;

*         $35 million for other programs, up from $30 million;

*         $23 million for construction programs, up from $8 million;

*         $118 million for the Medium Extended Air Defense System;

*         $935 million for the Theater High Altitude Air Defense System, up from $867 million;

*         $858 million for the Patriot PAC-3 system, down from $899 million (see GSN, Nov. 5, 2001);

*         $598 million for an airborne laser system, up from $476 million;

*         $815 million for the Space Based Infrared System-High satellite system, up from $439 million (see GSN, Jan. 8).

Funding for the SBIRS-High and airborne laser systems is administered by the MDA, which would receive $7.76 billion under the Bush plan (Center for Defense Information release, Feb. 4).

The proposed funding for the ballistic missile defense system would support efforts to integrate the boost, midcourse and terminal phases of the system (see GSN, Jan. 11).  It also includes plans to build a new test facility in Alaska, which would have five missile interceptors and a command center by 2007, according to Agence France-Presse.

U.S. President George W. Bush recently announced the U.S. intent to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty in order to conduct unrestricted missile defense testing (See GSN Dec. 13, 2001).  The MDA’s proposed budget is slightly less than the current funding level, however, because the planned testing does not require large amounts of new funding, said a senior defense official.

“There are many nominal cost ways to capture the data you would want at the system level if there were no treaty — radar assets, ship assets, combined tests for which no real money change is required,” the official said (Agence France-Presse, Feb. 4).

The biggest reduction in the missile defense budget proposal is a major two-year reduction in funding for the Space-Based Infrared System-Low of satellites, according to Defense Daily (see GSN, Dec. 19, 2001).  The system was to be made up of about 30 satellites that would be linked together to track and provide information on enemy ballistic missile in midcourse (Kerry Gildea, Defense Daily, Feb. 4).

Back to top

Israel:  U.S. and Israel Practice Defense Against Scuds

Israel and the United States conducted a joint exercise last month to test how the Arrow and Patriot missile defense systems would cooperate to protect Israel against Iraqi Scud missiles, Ha’aretz newspaper reported today.

“We concentrated on testing the ability of the Arrow and the Patriot systems to work together.  We have a very good ability to make the most of the deployment of forces and intercept the missiles,” said a senior Israeli military source.

To adequately defend against an Iraqi Scud attack, Israel would need additional Patriot batteries in the center of the country in addition to the Arrow and Patriot batteries it currently has, according to Ha’aretz.

The two countries have conducted similar exercises in the past, but this one was particularly important given speculation that the United States might attack Iraq, according to Ha’aretz (see GSN, Jan. 31).  If the United States were to attack Iraq, then Iraq might launch Scuds against Israel, Ha’aretz reported (see GSN, Jan. 31).  The Israeli military believes the United States would warn Israel of such an action and deploy U.S. Patriot batteries around the country, Ha’aretz reported (Amos Harel, Ha’aretz, Feb. 5).

Back to top

India:  Israeli Radar System Set Up in Kashmir

India has deployed an Israeli missile-tracking radar system along the disputed Indian-Pakistani line of control in Kashmir, the Calcutta Telegraph newspaper reported yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 17).

Although India is still negotiating with Israel to purchase the Green Pine radar system, elements of it appeared to be set up in Kashmir while Pakistan conducted military exercises at the end of October, according to the Telegraph.  The radar system could provide India with information on Pakistani installations near the border, such as nuclear facilities at Kakhuta and Sargodha, the Telegraph reported.  The system, which has at least one radar, was set up in Kashmir with the aid of Israeli technical experts, according to the Telegraph.

The Green Pine is a ground-based radar system that can track a missile for 400 kilometers, according to the Telegraph.  India is also considering purchasing an Israeli-made Arrow missile interceptor (see GSN, Jan. 16), which is often used in conjunction with the Green Pine system (Calcutta Telegraph, Feb. 4).

Back to top

Radiological Weapons:  NRC Signs Largest U.S. Potassium Iodide Deal

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has authorized a $1 million agreement with Anbex.com to supply 6 million doses of potassium iodide, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, Nov. 29, 2001).  The deal is the largest U.S. order for potassium iodide (see GSN, Jan. 14), a drug that helps prevent thyroid cancer in people exposed to radiation (Matthew Wald, New York Times, Feb. 5).

Back to top