US Congress clears the way for a space arms race

(December 22) The U.S. Congress has opened the way for a space arms race and altered U.S. nuclear defense doctrine simply by removing a single word from the Defense Authorization Act.

The change could result in allowing a costly program of space-based weaponry. The change was approved by large majorities in both the House and the Senate. Experts claim that the changes could heighten tensions with Russia and China and begin a new arms race. The bill still needs to be approved by President Obama. There has been no indication what he will do.

The U.S. depends upon a missile-defense system to respond to a small-scale attack such as might come from North Korea. A large scale strike by China or Russia is deterred through the capability of massive retaliation. Crucial to this strategy was the use of the term "limited" to apply to the homeland missile defense system. This language was carefully crafted in order to avoid an arms race with China and Russia.

With virtually no public debate, the word "limited" has been removed during the final approval of the Defense Authorization Act. Another provision of the laws urges the Pentagon to begin "research, development, test and evaluation " of space-based systems for missile defense. Any such program would depend upon annual funding and decisions by the incoming Trump administration to go ahead with the program.

Trump's appointee for Minister of Defense General James Mattis was on the board of the defense contractor General Dynamics. The U.S. government has already been working on a Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) defense system. Since 2002 to last year, the Pentagon has carried out 11 test flights. The interceptors launched from underground silos to hit their targets high above the Pacific failed to destroy them in six of eleven tests. Over the same period Boeing Co. the prime contractor for the GMD collected almost $2 billion in performance bonuses.

Both proponents and opponents of the altered policy agree that the change is significant. Representative Trent Franks the Republican who introduced and guided the amendments through the House said: “These amendments were historic in nature — given the paradigm shift forward that they represent.” Some leading defense scientists considered the idea of a space-based missile defense system pure fantasy. David Montague, a retired president of missile defense systems for Lockheed, and also a co-chair of a panel of the National Academy of Sciences that studied missile defense technologies at the request of Congress, said: “It defies the laws of physics and is not based on science of any kind. Even if we darken the sky with hundreds or thousands of satellites and interceptors, there’s no way to ensure against a dedicated attack. So it’s an opportunity to waste a prodigious amount of money.” It is also a golden opportunity for defense contractors to be awarded lucrative contracts with hefty profits. Montague was hardly careful in crafting his response to the provisions calling them "insanity, pure and simple". Yet there seems to be little opposition within congress and not all that much analysis or discussion about it in the press.

In 2012 a National Academy study had estimated that even a bare-bones space-based missile defense system would cost about $200 billion plus hundreds of billions more to operate over subsequent years. Given the cost and the likelihood of failure, any U.S. program may not provoke a corresponding program by China and Russia. When Franks was asked if the U.S. could afford the program he said: “What is national security worth? It’s priceless.”

Philip E. Coyle III, a former assistant secretary of Defense who headed the Pentagon office responsible for testing and evaluating weapon systems, said the whole notion of a space-based defense system was a sham: “To do this would cost just gazillions and gazillions. The technology isn’t at hand — nor is the money. It’s unfortunate from my point of view that the Congress doesn’t see that. Both Russia and China will use it as an excuse to do something that they want to do.”

Franks said that he had drawn inspiration for his plan from President Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative that took place in the 1980's. The plan was to use lasers and other space-based weapons to destroy nuclear weapons and was known as "Star Wars". While the initiative spent $30 billion of taxpayer money, there was no system deployed.

The Obama administration has objected to the elimination of the term "limited" and to placing anti-missile weapons in space, but there has as yet been no threat of a veto. A final objection to the changes came from Vice Admiral James Syring, director of the Missile Defense Agency who said: “I have serious concerns about the technical feasibility of the interceptors in space and I have serious concerns about the long-term affordability of a program like that.” The experts somehow miss the fact that the program will create many new jobs and boost the profits and stock prices of important defense contractors. The program is a generous Xmas gift for the military-industrial complex.

U.S. building an anti-missile radar facility in Qatar

 The Wall Street journal reports that the base will be built in a secret location in Qatar. The facility will be just one part of a system meant to defend U.S. facilities and also its Gulf area allies against Iranian rockets according to anonymous U.S. officials.
      This site plus two other sites in Turkey and the Negev Desert form an arc. The three sites together can detect any missiles launched deep inside Iran from northern, southern or western Iran. The radar stations also link to interceptor batteries throughout the region and to U.S. ships that have high altitude interceptor rockets.
     Qatar is home to the largest U.S. military base in the region, All Udeid Air Base. Together with another base a total of 8,000 U.S. troops are in Qatar. In response to an Al Jazeera reporter's question about the site, the Pentagon replied."We have a number of allies and partners in the region with whom we seek to build greater cooperation, and our goal is to address a wide range of US security interests there."   U.S. officials claim the U.S. Central Command intends to deploy a THADD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) system within the next few months. For more see this article.

US proposal doesn't fly in Russia

This is from presstv.ir

Russia for its part has refrained from placing missiles in Kalliningrad as a response to the US missiled defence system. Obama is reviewing the whole program. It is quite possible that he may decide that it will not work or is not worth all the trouble independently of what happens between Iran and Russia. However using the issue as a bargaining chip is worth a try I suppose!



US proposal pops no eyes out in Russia Sun, 15 Feb 2009 10:52:47 GMT

The Russian flag flies at half mast at the Kremlin where the prevailing belief is that the idea of Iran posing a missile threat is a fairy tale.Russia promises not to change its stance on Iran in spite of US efforts to reach a compromise with the Kremlin over its missile shield. In an exclusive interview on Sunday, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexei Borodavkin asserted that under no circumstances would Moscow agree to jeopardize its constantly improving economic, industrial, nuclear and technical cooperation with Tehran. "The Kremlin sees no reason to change its policy toward Iran," IRNA quoted Borodavkin as saying. His claims come amid Washington efforts to employ plans to deploy a missile defense system in Europe as a bargaining chip to woo Russia against Iran. A senior US officials speaking on condition of anonymity had touched on the issue on Friday, saying that Washington would slow down its missile plans on the condition that Moscow joins the White House in pressuring Tehran over its nuclear activities. Washington has spearheaded accusations that Iran, a signatory to the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), is pursuing a military nuclear program. Iran, however, says it enriches uranium for civilian applications and that it has a right to the technology already in the hands of many others. "If we are able to work together to dissuade Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapons capability, we would be able to moderate the pace of development of missile defenses in Europe," Reuters quoted the US official as saying on the issue. "The impetus for the deployment of the missile defense systems is the threat from Iran. If it is possible to address that then that needs to be taken into consideration as you look at the deployment of the system," the official said. The Bush administration strived to portray Iran's uranium enrichment program, missile development and space quest as threats to world stability in an attempt to justify its plans to station 10 silo-based missiles in Poland and a missile-tracking radar in the Czech Republic. Russia has remained stoutly opposed to the US missile bid, threatening to respond by installing short-rage Iskander-M missiles in Kaliningrad -- a small strategic exclave near Poland. Moscow has refused to follow Washington's lead in isolating Iran, criticizing the US pursuit as a "creeping American strategy of dragging the global community into a large-scale crisis around Iran." The Kremlin has also dismissed contentions that Tehran should be considered as a threat. "No sensible person believes in fairy tales about the Iranian missile threat, and that thousands of kilometers from Tehran on the coast of the Baltic Sea, it is necessary to station a missile interceptor system," Russia's NATO envoy Dmitry Rogozin said on Nov. 6.

Czechs oppose US missile plan.

This is from the News. This poll confirms what has been obvious for a long time in the Czech republic. Perhaps the government will listen one of these years. Probably the next election year!





Czechs oppose US missile plan



Wednesday, January 09, 2008
PRAGUE, Czech Republic: Most Czechs continued to oppose plans to place parts of a US missile defence system in the country, according to a poll released on Tuesday.

According to a public poll conducted by the CVVM agency, 70 per cent of respondents oppose the idea of hosting a missile tracking radar system at a base in a military area near Prague as part of the system.

The government-sponsored agency said a total of 1,056 people aged 15 and older were questioned between Dec 3-10, with 23 per cent approving the plan. Seven per cent were undecided.

The latest result of the poll conducted by the agency six times last year indicated the highest number of opponents so far. In April and November, 68 per cent of respondents were against the missile defence base.

The US is in talks with the Czech government about the missile plans. Washington also wants to place 10 interceptor missiles in Poland as part of a defence shield that US officials say is needed to protect against a possible threat from Iran. The Czech government has been receptive to the proposal, which has been strongly opposed by Russia. Opposition parties have demanded a national referendum on the issue.

New Intelligence re Iran complicates selling Missile Defense Plan

No one not completely bamboozled by Bush admin. lies ever thought that the missile defense scheme was directed at Iran. Originally North Korea was mentioned as well. Gee. Why not Cuba or Venezuela? Russia regards itself as the main target and why not? It makes much more sense, if there is any sense to the project at all. Anyway the removal of much of the rationale doesn't change the administration's mind. If the rationale is just a lie in the first place that makes perfect sense.
This article does not mention that majorities in both Poland and the Czech republic are against playing a role in the system. With a new government in Poland the US may have even more trouble getting Polish co-operation.


US Presses on With Missile Defense Plan
By DESMOND BUTLER, Associated Press Writer

Thursday, December 6, 2007

(12-06) 10:04 PST WASHINGTON, (AP) --


The United States says it will not alter plans to build a missile defense system in Europe despite findings by U.S. intelligence agencies that Iran does not have an active nuclear weapons program.


Since U.S. officials have said the threat from Iran was the main reason for building the defense shield, however, the Americans may have a harder time persuading European allies that it still is necessary.


Already, a Czech official responsible for explaining the need for the missile defense system to the public in his country says his job has become more difficult after Monday's release of the National Intelligence Estimate on Iran. The report, reflecting analyses of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies, concluded that Iran suspended its attempt to build a nuclear weapon four years ago.


"Czech newspapers are full of headlines saying there is no longer a need for missile defense," said Tomas Klvana, the Czech government's coordinator for missile defense communication, who is in Washington for talks with administration officials and lawmakers. "It is hard for complex arguments to win against simple headlines."


The proposed system would include radar installations in the Czech Republic and interceptors based in Poland.


Klvana says the potential threat from ballistic missiles aimed at Europe remains, whether Iran is pursuing nuclear weapons or not.


That view is shared by the Bush administration.


"The missile threat from Iran continues to progress and to cause us to be very concerned," said Undersecretary of State John Rood, lead U.S. negotiator on European missile defense issues. "Missile defense would be useful regardless of what kind of payload, whether that be conventional, chemical, biological or nuclear."


Rood said the United States still hopes to build the system, which would include radar installations in the Czech Republic and interceptors based in Poland and have it online by 2013.


The United States has said that those sites were chosen to position the system to counter a threat from Iran, but Russia has objected strenuously to the plans, arguing that the system could undermine the deterrence of its nuclear arsenal. The disagreement has led to the worst friction in U.S.-Russian relations since the Cold War.


On Tuesday, Rood reiterated the U.S. position on the threat from Iran in talks with one of the most vocal critics of the U.S. plans, Russian Army Chief of Staff Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky. Baluyevsky is in Washington at the invitation of his U.S. counterpart, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Adm. Mike Mullen.


Rood has pointed to Iran's announcement this month that it has manufactured new missiles with a range of 1,200 miles. That distance would put parts of southeastern Europe in targeting range. U.S. officials have said they recently provided Russia with intelligence on the developments in Iran's missile program.


Rep. Ellen Tauscher, the California Democrat who a heads a congressional panel that has steered money bills for U.S. missile defense programs, also says the National Intelligence Estimate will not affect funding considerations for the project.


"The NIE does not play into our consideration," she said. "Nothing has changed."


Tauscher successfully pushed to withhold financing for construction of the site in Poland in a bill passed last month that provided most of the money requested by the Bush administration for the overall program. She says she would consider seeking to restore it in future legislation if the interceptor system were tested properly and if the administration won approval for the plans from the Polish and Czech governments.


That effort now seems more complicated by a perception in those countries that the administration has oversold the threat from Iran.


"The United States has been adamant in not tying missile defense plans in Europe to a threat from Russia," says Julianne Smith, director of the Center for Strategic and International Studies' Europe program. "If you knock down the threat from Iran, it complicates the communications strategy."