|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
British Plans: Defense Ministry Approves Fylingdales UpgradeBy David Ruppe Defense Secretary Geoffrey Hoon sent a letter to the House of Commons announcing he would reply favorably yesterday to the request, made by U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld in December (see GSN, Dec. 16, 2002). The United States now has permission to upgrade the radar at the Fylingdales air base so it can track future long-range ballistic missile attacks from the Middle East. The Bush administration has sought the improvement as part of its effort to develop and deploy a national missile defense system. U.S. officials and experts have said the upgraded radar would be key for using U.S. missile defense capabilities to defend against an attack from the Middle East. Last year, the U.S. intelligence community reported that potential aggressors Iran, and Iraq if free of current U.N. sanctions, could develop long-range missiles in as little as 13 years. “Stinks of Hypocrisy” Supporters and opponents of the British decision alike criticized the timing of the announcement. “They stifled debate on missile defense until the Christmas holidays, and then rushed out the policy through with the minimum of debate,” said shadow defense secretary Bernard Jenkins, a missile defense proponent quoted by the BBC. “The whole process stinks of hypocrisy,” he said. The House of Commons Defense Committee in a report last week approved allowing the upgrade, but criticized the government for announcing support for the upgrade before the public deliberations had run full course. The committee rushed production of the report to ensure its views were known in anticipation of quick government approval. “Having followed military decision-making in the U.K. for 20 years, I can’t say I am surprised that this announcement has been sneaked out while the media's attention is focused on Secretary of State Powell’s testimony before the Security Council,” said analyst Nigel Chamberlain, from the British American Security Information Council. “Defense Secretary Hoon has managed to anger the Defense Committee, treat his parliamentary colleagues with a degree of contempt and ignore the British electorate by prevaricating for two years and then compressing what passes for consultation into two months, including a holiday period,” he said. Hoon in his statement today said, “I am now satisfied that we have been able to take fully into account the views of all interested parties in coming to a decision.” Ministry spokeswoman Melissa Maynard said “there is no significance in the time” of the announcement. “I’m afraid just that it needs to be done,” she said. Chamberlain said the ministry next must determine whether it needs permission from the local planning authorities for the upgrade, and said “they feel quite confident in that they will not need permission.”
From February 6, 2003 issue.Jordan: Country to Begin Receiving Patriot Batteries TodayThe first of a shipment of three U.S. Patriot missile interceptor batteries is expected to arrive in Jordan today, according to the Daily Star (see GSN, Jan. 29). The batteries are set to be operational by Feb. 15 and will be sent back to the United States once any potential military conflict with Iraq is resolved, officials said. A small contingent of U.S. personnel will operate the batteries, they said (Rana Sabbagh-Gargour, Daily Star, Feb. 6).
From February 4, 2003 issue.U.S. Plans: Pentagon Projects Budget Plateau After Initial IncreaseBy David Ruppe The agency expects to spend between $7.7 billion in fiscal 2004 and $8.7 billion in 2009 on research, development and testing of its systems, according to the budget documents. It says it budgeted $6.7 billion research, development, test and evaluation in fiscal 2003. A senior Pentagon official said Friday the military was planning to spend more on missile defense this year than last because of an increase in development and testing of systems. “Why are we spending more? Well we’ve moved, as I’ve told a number of you, from the research side to the development side in a much bigger way. Once the ABM [Anti-Ballistic Missile] Treaty went away we could start doing more than just speculating about sea-based capabilities, for example,” the official said. With the U.S. withdrawal from the ABM Treaty last June, the Pentagon was able to incorporate Navy sensors into its high-profile, long-range intercept testing. Also contained in the 2004 budget, according to Pentagon officials, is increased funding for purchasing a range of systems and upgrades to deploy an initial missile defense capability by the end of 2005. Pentagon officials estimate those purchases will add $1.5 billion to the missile defense budget over the next two years. By the end of fiscal 2005, the agency plans to procure numerous systems for fielding an initial capability to defend the United States, including up to 20 ground-based missile interceptors, 20 sea-based interceptors deployed on three reconfigured ships, land- and sea-based radar and sensors, and 15 upgraded surveillance and tracking ships (see GSN, Dec. 17). At Least $9 billion Requested The agency’s budget projections do not account for future weapons purchases by the services, however, nor for funding requested by the Army and the Joint Chiefs of Staff for missile defense programs, which total nearly $1.4 billion for fiscal 2004. Counting the requested Missile Defense Agency budget, and requests for Army and Joint Chiefs of Staff programs, the Bush administration is asking for an estimated $9.1 billion for fiscal 2004, making it the Pentagon’s largest budgeted weapons program. Defense budget analyst Christopher Hellman, of the Center for Defense Information, said that Pentagon missile defense total should be closer to $10 billion, as it does not account for $713 million requested for the Air Force in 2004, which the Pentagon identifies as having a missile defense mission. Missile defense critic John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World, said he is skeptical the Pentagon’s forecast budgets will sufficiently fund the administration’s plans. “They claim that these additional capabilities are not all that expensive, $1.5 billion over two years, so that’s why the budget does not go shooting up,” he said. “If I were the conservatives and looked at this budget over five years or six years, and looked at this deployment in Alaska and California, I’d say, ‘is that all there is?’ From the left, you’d say, ‘is this the camel’s nose under the tent?’” he said. Baker Spring, a Heritage Foundation missile defense proponent, says the $1.5 billion should be sufficient. “This is an incremental cost, it’s not coming from zero. [It is] coming from a baseline that was already $8 billion,” he said. “There has been a train now for over a year planning for a Pacific base and test bed. It’s that increment that takes you from the test bed to that operational capability that you really need to account for here,” he said. Congress, in the past two years, has appropriated more than $1 billion each year for missile defense above the agency’s request. Questions About the Budget The total Pentagon missile defense budget request only recently climbed to its currently stated $9.1 billion level. The Pentagon requested $3.5 billion in fiscal 1998, $4.7 billion in 2001, and $8.3 billion in 2002. Those increases began during the Clinton administration. The Bush administration is now pursuing more aggressively a broader range of interceptor systems and sensors and a complex integrated command and control system for identifying, tracking and destroying ballistic missile threats in various stages of flight. Representative John Spratt (S.C.), the House Budget Committee ranking Democrat, recently argued that the administration’s funding level is too high. “The problem with this emphasis on missile defense is that it draws both funding and attention away from nonproliferation efforts, which have an enormous potential,” he said at an Arms Control Association event last month. “While the defense budget has grown substantially over the last three years, funding for nonproliferation essentially stands where it stood in President [Bill] Clinton’s last budget,” he said. The Bush administration did request significant increases for nonproliferation budgets this year, an 8 percent increase for the Pentagon’s Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, a 30 percent increase for the Energy Department’s nonproliferation programs, and a 17 percent decrease for the State Department’s smaller nonproliferation budget, resulting largely from cancelled nuclear aid for North Korea (see GSN, Jan. 30).
From February 4, 2003 issue.Israel: U.S. and Israel Carry Out Joint Patriot Missile ExercisesThe United States and Israel carried out joint a Patriot missile preparedness exercise in Southern Negev, Ha’aretz newspaper said today (see GSN, Jan. 21). As many as 14 Patriot missiles were fired Tuesday to test Israel’s defenses against incoming ballistic missiles. Residents in the area reported hearing loud explosions, Ha’aretz said, citing army radio. The Israeli army said the test was part of joint U.S. and Israeli exercises which had been planned two years ago. About 200 soldiers have been in Israel as part of these joint operations code named “Juniper Cobra,” a biennial event that has been altered this year to focus on the current crisis in Iraq, according to Ha’aretz. During the Gulf War Iraq fired 39 Scud missiles at Israel, although they all hit relatively rural targets and caused little damage. Israeli officials fear if there is another war, Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein may try to attack Israel again (Ha’aretz, Feb. 4).
From February 3, 2003 issue.U.S. Plans: Pentagon Aims for Miniature Interceptor Testing by 2005By David Ruppe The “miniature kill vehicles” are not expected to be ready for deployment until sometime after 2010, agency spokesman Lt. Col. Richard Lehner said today. They have been considered a risky technology because of challenges in reducing the size and mass of traditional kill vehicle technologies and reducing cost. Some experts consider the miniature interceptors a more viable alternative to the agency’s current approach to defending the United States from long-range missile warheads. The current approach seeks to intercept an enemy warhead with a single “exo-atmospheric kill vehicle” launched by a ground-based missile. Critics have charged that such a single interceptor can be easily fooled by simple countermeasures such as decoys and camouflage (see GSN, Oct. 17, 2002). Depending on the development of the technology, 20 to 40 miniature interceptors would be deployed from a single launcher to attack warhead and decoys alike. For further information, see:
About Newswire | Contact National Journal | Re-Use Guidelines
HOME | CONTACT US | GET INVOLVED | SITE MAP |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
Back to top