U.S. Plans:  Classified Document Cites North Korea as Missile Threat

U.S. President George W. Bush cited North Korea as a missile threat to the United States in a classified document justifying a national ballistic missile defense system, the Washington Times reported today (see GSN, May 21).

Bush signed the classified document, National Security Presidential Directive-23, in December and the White House released an unclassified fact sheet on the directive last week.  The unclassified document, however, does not make direct reference to North Korea.

“Some states, such as North Korea, are aggressively pursuing the development of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles as a means of coercing the United States and our allies,” the classified presidential directive says.

The United States will seek to field the missile defense system in 2004 and upgrade missile defense capabilities in 2005.

“In addition, the United States will seek permission respectively from the (United Kingdom) and Denmark to upgrade early warning radar in Fylingdales and Thule, Greenland, as part of our capability,” the directive says (see GSN, Feb. 6 and April 25).  The directive also instructs the secretaries of state and defense to “promote international missile defense cooperation” within military alliances, the Times reported (see GSN, May 23; Bill Gertz, Washington Times, May 27).

Silo Construction Underway in Alaska

Meanwhile, construction is underway on several missile silos at Fort Greely in Alaska, the Washington Post reported today (see GSN, Dec. 18, 2002).  The silos are part of the Bush administration’s efforts to deploy limited national missile defenses beginning next year.

Workers have been lowering steel cylinders into recently dug 80-foot-deep holes at the facility, according to the Post.  Technicians are also lining the walls of the new facility’s buildings with steel plates, in part to protect against the electromagnetic effects of a high-altitude nuclear blast.

Officials at Fort Greely have identified 13,000 separate tasks that need to be completed before Sept. 30, 2004, when the base is scheduled to be operational (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, May 27).

Back to top

Russia:  Surface-to-Air Missile System Could be Base for European Missile Defense, Russian General Says

Recent tests have demonstrated that the Russian Triumph S-400 surface-to-air missile system is capable of defending an area the size of a European country from a missile attack, Russian Army Gen. Anatoly Kornukov said last week (see GSN, May 15).  The system could also serve as the base for a European nonstrategic missile defense, Kornukov said (ITAR-Tass, May 22 in FBIS-SOV, May 23).

Back to top

U.S.-Russia:  Russian Official Hopeful For Missile Defense Cooperation

A senior Russian official said yesterday he has “cautious optimism” that Moscow will cooperate with the United States to build a missile defense system (see GSN, May 15).

“It is still too early to talk about the prospects for cooperation, but I can take the risk of expressing very cautious optimism in this regard,” said the official, who is in Washington for meetings with U.S. officials.

Moscow has submitted several proposals to the United States for missile defense cooperation.  “We are hoping for a U.S. response very soon,” the senior official said (David Sands, Washington Times, May 23).

Back to top

United States:  Electromagnetic Radiation Affected Patriot Performance

U.S. military investigators believe that electromagnetic interference played a role in a friendly fire incident involving Patriot missile interceptor batteries during the war in Iraq, the Wall Street Journal reported today (see GSN, May 8).

One of the two friendly fire incidents that occurred during the war  involved the downing of a U.S. Navy F/A-18 Hornet by a Patriot interceptor.  The U.S. Army’s investigation into the incident has so far indicated that two Patriot batteries were placed too close to each other, according to the Journal.

While the Patriot’s radar systems are designed to operate somewhat near each other, the two batteries’ proximity caused increased amounts of electromagnetic interference which investigators believe played a role in the incident, the Journal reported.

High-tech military equipment, such as the Patriot interceptor, is tested to determine the effects of electromagnetic interference prior to deployment, according to the Journal.  One person familiar with the investigation described the interference where the F/A-18 incident occurred, however, as “very, very intense.”

“If you look at the intensity of the radiation in that battlefield area, I don’t believe anyone would say that particular environment had been duplicated before,” the source said.

The Army and U.S. defense contractor Raytheon, which produces the Patriot system, are determining whether changes can be made to the interceptor’s computer system to prevent against such an incident in the future, U.S. and industry officials said (Anne Marie Squeo, Wall Street Journal, May 23).

Back to top

U.S. Plans:  Missile Defense Justification Released by White House

In a policy paper released yesterday, the White House described its rationale for developing a national missile defense network, the Washington Post reported (see GSN, May 19).

The National Policy on Ballistic Missile Defense Fact Sheet lays out U.S. President George W. Bush’s desire to protect the United States against missiles carrying chemical, biological or nuclear weapons with defenses that will cost more than $8 billion per year and will probably top $9 billion in fiscal 2004 alone, according to the Post.

The White House directive was also intended to provide a more formal and complete account of Bush’s missile defense push, administration officials said.  Last year, Bush signed a classified version of what was fundamentally the same document prior to his missile defense announcement in December (see GSN, Dec. 17, 2002).  Administration officials have kept close hold on the directive, known as National Security Presidential Directive 23, while developing plans for its release (Bradley Graham, Washington Post, May 21).

The document does not provide any significant deviation from previous administration statements, but it does note that U.S. missile defenses will be continuously upgraded, the New York Times reported.

“The United States will not have a final, fixed missile defense architecture,” but will develop an “initial set of capabilities that will evolve to meet the changing threat,” the directive said.

The White House also expressed its desire to provide missile defenses to allies, according to the document.

“The defenses we will develop and deploy must be capable of not only defending the United States and our deployed forces, but also friends and allies,” the directive says.

Russian Collaboration

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Ivanov repeated his country’s offer to collaborate on a missile defense effort.  He said, however, that cooperation would require “the preservation of each side’s intellectual property, the demilitarization of space and total transparency regarding missile defense” (see GSN, May 15; David Sanger, New York Times, May 21).

Ivanov is scheduled to visit the United States this week to meet with U.S. officials, Agence France-Presse reported (Agence France-Presse/Yahoo!News, May 21).

“We are prepared to talk with the United States on the theme of cooperation in the field of anti-missile defense, but attached to the fulfillment of a number of conditions,” he said.

He also warned that developing a system would take “decades.”

“Tangible results cannot be expected within a year or two,” Ivanov said (Associated Press/San Jose Mercury News, May 21).

Export Controls May Be Eased

U.S. officials are also investigating the possible easing of export controls on missile technology, according to the Associated Press.

“As part of our efforts to deepen missile cooperation with friends and allies, the United States will seek to eliminate impediments to such cooperation,” the report says.

Under existing rules, it is difficult to share missile technology with most U.S. allies, AP reported.

“We will review existing policies and practices governing technology-sharing and cooperation on missile defense, including U.S. export control regulations and statutes,” according to the White House policy statement.

A Bush administration official said the effort was “far from a decision.”  Arms control proponents, however, criticized the proposed move.

“It is a silly trade-off.  It shows the administration is willing to compromise international controls to transfer missile technology” to further its missile defense goals, said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association (Tom Raum, Associated Press/Newsday, May 21).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP