U.S.-Canada:  Chretien Supports Missile Defense Involvement

Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien has thrown his country’s support behind a U.S. plan to develop a missile defense shield, Canada’s National Post reported Saturday (see GSN, May 30).

Ottawa approved negotiations Thursday with U.S. defense officials on missile defense cooperation.

“We are starting discussions because it is the defense of our cities.  The Americans do want to defend effectively New York, Boston, Washington, Chicago and Seattle.  Physically they have to stop the missiles before they get to Vancouver, Toronto, Ottawa or Montreal,” Chretien said.  However, he said he remained opposed to the weaponization of space.

“We are talking at this time about the defense from missiles.  It is not the weaponization of space.  It is establishing a defense system to protect North America,” he said.  “There will not be a program in which we will participate if it is to be the weaponization of the space,” he added (Fife/Alberts, National Post, May 31).

A recently released report from the Canadian Defense Science Advisory Board recommends Ottawa become involved in the missile defense effort.  The study was completed last August but was not made public until recently.

“This would be prudent given the threat to our forces and could position Canada much more strongly for continental missile defense in the future,” the advisory board’s report says (Canadian Press, June 1).

Back to top

European Plans:  NATO Panel Approves Missile Defense Study Requirements

NATO’s Military Committee last week approved a document detailing what officials want to see in a missile defense feasibility study to be conducted later this year (see GSN, May 15).

The classified military operational requirement was approved May 27 in remarkably short time, Jane’s Defense Weekly reported this week.  The contract for the study should be issued in October, Jane’s reported.

“There has been goodwill, accommodation and flexibility all round, and in a compressed timescale,” according to a NATO armaments official.  “The point of the new feasibility study is to inform a (future deployment) decision, not to presume it.  It is an options analysis to form a baseline from which that decision will be made — how and whether to go beyond TMD [theater missile defense],” he added (Luke Hill, Jane’s Defense Weekly, June 4).

Back to top

Israel:  U.S. Congress Cautions Against Arrow Missile Exports

Congress has warned Israel not to export the Arrow missile defense system without prior approval from Washington, Defense Week reported today (see GSN, Jan. 21).

The Arrow system was developed jointly by the United States and Israel, where it is currently deployed.  Washington paid most of the development costs for the system and also contributes to production costs, according to Defense Week (see GSN, Feb. 12).

In a new report, the House Armed Services Committee said, “The committee has reservations about recent interest shown by Israel in the sale of Arrow to third parties.  In the more general context of international cooperative missile defense programs, the committee has concerns regarding how such sales comport with the obligations of the United States under international treaties and agreements, the possibility of technology transfers that might assist foreign offensive missile programs and the rights of the United States to share in revenue generated through third party sales.”

The Senate Armed Services committee also complained about the potential Israeli export of a U.S.-funded program.

“The committee notes that the Department of Defense provided two-thirds of the funding for the development of the Arrow system and continues to provide funding for Arrow production, and that the Arrow system embodies U.S.-developed technologies,” according to a report from the Senate committee.  “The committee notes that any sale of the Arrow ballistic missile defense system to third parties should take place only after approval by the U.S. government, pursuant to the requirements of existing law,” the report says.

Exporting the Arrow might be prohibited by the Missile Technology Control Regime, but U.S. defense contractor Boeing ships Arrow parts to Israel for final assembly to avoid MTCR restrictions, Defense Week reported.  U.S. President George W. Bush has supported loosening the MTCR to allow for the proliferation of missile defense technologies (see GSN, May 21; John Donnelly, Defense Week, June 2).

Back to top

U.S. Plans:  GAO Recommends Missile Defense Agency Reconsider Satellite Development Plan

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — The U.S. Missile Defense Agency needs to consider alternative approaches to the development of its Space Tracking and Surveillance System — a constellation of satellites designed to be a component of a U.S. missile defense system, the U.S. General Accounting Office said in a report released yesterday (see GSN, April 14).

The Space Tracking and Surveillance System, formerly known as Space-Based Infrared System Low, is intended to be a system of U.S. satellites that would detect and track an enemy ballistic missile through all stages of flight.  In its development of the satellite system, the MDA chose a strategy of incremental development, “rather than trying to make a big leap in its capability,” the GAO report says.  The MDA’s development strategy called for competition in the development and production of acquisition and tracking sensors that would be installed in the satellites and for the launch of “demonstration” satellites prior to large-scale production, the report says.

“This strategy helps to reduce risks because it ensures technology is sufficiently mature and capabilities have been demonstrated before a greater investment is made,” the report says.

The GAO determined, however, that recent decisions made by the MDA would limit the agency’s ability to achieve its original goals for the satellite system and limit the amount of information that could be learned through satellite demonstrations.  For example, the MDA decided to retrieve satellite and ground system components from storage that had been previously partially constructed, complete the assembly of these systems and then launch two satellites in 2007 to take part in larger missile defense tests, according to the report. 

To meet the 2007 launch date, however, the MDA eliminated its plans to have two contractors compete for the production of satellite acquisitions sensors and, instead, will only fund the separate development of an alternative acquisition sensor design.  This approach could result in higher overall costs for the satellite system because the MDA could be “locked in” to employing one contractor for the production of a large satellite system, the report says.

The MDA’s decision to complete the development of “legacy” satellites will also delay the development of new demonstration satellites, the report says.  While the agency could learn much information from the deployment of the legacy satellites, the MDA has already decided that it wants to investigate other designs and technologies for the planned satellite system, it says.

“As a result, delaying work on the next generation of satellites will delay work that could offer a better basis from which MDA could build operational capability,” the report says.  

The MDA’s decision to launch two satellites in 2007 was made before it had completed an assessment of the working condition of the equipment needed to finish the construction of the satellites, according to the report.  Because of this, the agency does not know what work still needs to be completed or how much that work will cost, the report says.

In its report, the GAO recommended that the MDA focus its spending on completing an assessment on what remains to be done to complete legacy satellite components so the agency has a basis for its cost and schedule estimates.  The report also recommends that the MDA assess alternative development strategies “that may offer opportunities to reduce risks and gain more knowledge.”

According to the report, the agency had considered two such alternatives, but they are constrained by the MDA’s need to participate in missile defense tests scheduled for 2006 and 2007.  One such approach involved delaying the launch of the two legacy satellites till 2008.  The second involved ending work on the legacy satellites and a shift in emphasis toward the development of new demonstration satellites.

Back to top

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

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP