Missile Defense Monitor

The following is a summary of recent non-National Defense Authorization Act-related missile defense news and developments.

1) According to a new study conducted by the Center for Business & Economic Research (CBER) at the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, the economic impacts of the Boeing Company’s work on Ground Based Midcourse Defense (GMD) in Alabama in 2007 include:

• Nearly 5,600 direct and indirect jobs
  
• $80 million payroll
  
• $198 million in Alabama household earnings
  
• 38 jobs created in the state for every 10 Boeing GMD jobs
  
• The highly skilled, high-income GMD program work force earned an average of 1.9 times the average 2006 wage for an Alabama worker.

Such statistics are important in understanding the relatively strong bipartisan support commanded by missile defense. Let us consider why.

While Congress has been willing to cut funds for and place restrictions on certain missile defense programs, it has ultimately failed to make substantial inroads in the overall missile defense budget. For example, of the $57.9 billion the president has requested for the missile defense agency (MDA) since ‘01, Congress has appropriated $57.8 billion.

The Bush administration’s theological devotion to missile defense, a Republican dominated Congress over the past seven years, and the fact that the Joint Chiefs (who have traditionally been hostile to large missile defense budgets) have not opposed increased funding for missile defense because the overall defense budget has risen along with it explains a great deal about why MDA’s budget has become so grossly inflated.

However, there is another, oft-overlooked, rationale at work here.

Since 2006, Rep. John Tierney (D-MA) has introduced an amendment to the National Defense Authorization Act to cut the overall missile defense budget. Not surprisingly, Republicans have voted overwhelmingly against the amendment. Yet how is one to explain Democratic votes on the amendment? In 2006, 117 Democrats voted in favor, while 80 voted against. In 2007 the count was 124 in favor, 105 against. In 2008, it was 117 in favor, 111 against.

The University of Alabama study provides a window as to why the votes have unfolded as they have. Missile defense assets have been farmed-out to locations all across the country. The economic benefits that have accrued to local economies from this process have created a powerful political constituency that is invested in the perpetuation of the status quo. This constituency consists of both Democrats and Republicans, and it is an obstacle to those of us who think that missile defense programs should only be funded if they have proven themselves to be on the road to operationally-demonstrated effectiveness. Just because a program is in the parochial interests of a district or state, does not mean that U.S. taxpayers should pay for it.

2) In other news, the Pentagon recently announced that a $100 million GMD test scheduled for July has been delayed until at least October. The test was originally scheduled for April, was pushed back until July, and has now been delayed again. I don’t have much to say about this other than that it is simply further evidence of GMD's technological dubiousness.

3) Finally, the first Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile unit has been activated at Fort Bliss in El Paso, Texas. THAAD is a ground-based missile defense system designed to destroy short- and medium- range ballistic missiles during the late-midcourse and terminal phases of flight.

One of the virtues of THAAD is that it is focused on the near-term threat posed by medium- and short-range ballistic missiles. This is why the House Armed Services Committee authorized $939.9 million for THAAD in FY 2009, an increase of $75 million over the Bush administration’s original request.

However, a key shortcoming of THAAD, is that on occasions where it is deployed to destroy targets outside the Earth’s atmosphere, it will be vulnerable to decoys and countermeasures.

Lt. Gen. Robert Gard Debates Frank Gaffney on the Impact of the NPT

The Center's senior military fellow, Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, debated Frank Gaffney on the impact of the 1968 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on U.S. policy both then and now on CSPAN earlier today.

Click here to watch the debate using either Flash or Windows Media Player.

National Security Legislative Wrap-Up

Congress took action on a number of national security bills before heading out for the Memorial Day recess.

Last week, the Senate completed action on the Supplemental Appropriations Bill to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. As in the House, the bill was divided into three parts. The Senate approved funding for the war, rejected Iraq-related provisions and added, with a veto-proof majority, the G.I. bill and a number of domestic funding provisions.

The House of Representatives last week completed action on the Fiscal Year 2009 Defense Authorization Bill, rejecting funding for the Reliable Replacement Warhead, rejecting amendments to increase and to decrease missile defense spending and adding a provision requiring congressional approval of any long term security arrangement with Iraq.

FISCAL YEAR 2008 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION BILL

On May 22, the full Senate completed action on the bill. The Senate approved $169 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan by a vote of 70 – 26. The 26 votes against the bill were a significant increase from the 14 votes against a similar bill last year. The Senate rejected a second amendment with a number of Iraq-war related provisions by a vote of 34 – 63, with both Republicans and anti-war Democrats voting “no.” In a surprise, the Senate approved a package that included the G.I. bill and domestic provisions by a lopsided vote of 75 -22. That amendment included an extension of unemployment benefits, a delay of Medicaid rule changes proposed by the Bush Administration, $10.4 billion for hurricane and disaster relief ! and $1 billion for low-income home heating assistance.

The Supplemental bill now moves back to the House for approval, rejection or modification of the Senate-passed measure, likely early in June, before going to the President for signature or a veto.

FISCAL YEAR 2009 DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL

On May 22, the full House approved the bill by a vote of 384 – 23. Several of the key recorded national security votes were:

• Franks (R-AZ) amendment to add $719 million for missile defense, the amount cut by the committee, failed 186 – 229.
• Tierney (D-MA) amendment to transfer $966 million from missile defense to other programs failed 111 – 292.
• Pearce (R-NM) amendment to add $10 million for the Reliable Replacement Warhead failed 145 – 271.
• Lee (D-CA) amendment to require any long-term agreement between the U.S. and Iraq to receive congressional approval was adopted 234 – 183.
• Braley (D-IA) amendment requiring a report on the long-term costs of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was adopted 245 – 168.
• Price (D-NC) amendment barring contractors from being used in interrogations was adopted 240 – 168.
• Holt (D-NJ) amendment requiring videotaping or electronic recording of detainee interrogations was adopted 218 – 192.

The full Senate is likely to consider the bill in June.

FISCAL YEAR 2009 BUDGET RESOLUTION

A House-Senate conference to resolve differences between the two versions of the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Resolution was concluded before the Memorial Day recess, but delayed final approval until after the Memorial Day recess. The conferees agreed on a $3 trillion budget that is about $20 billion above President Bush's request. If the budget resolution is approved, it will be the first time since 2000.

Vacation to North Korea?

Jealous of the New York Philharmonic’s recent trip to North Korea? Well, don’t be. For about $8400, Abercrombie & Kent’s Marco Polo Club will send you to Beijing and Pyongyang for about a week in early September.

According to their promotional materials,

To most Westerners North Korea is a closed society, a "Hermit Kingdom" rarely visited and poorly understood. As a valued Marco Polo Club member you have the unique opportunity to visit this little-known country, meet its people and witness the Arirang Mass Games, a spectacle of athleticism and national pride unlike anything else in the world. Glimpse North Korea's daily life as you journey through Pyongyang to view the monuments and tributes to former leader Kim Il Sung. Travel to the Demilitarized Zone, the most heavily armed border in the world, and visit the site where the 1953 armistice was signed. Learn about the Korean War from a North Korean perspective when you explore the Victorious Fatherland Liberation War Museum. Begin and end your journey in exciting Beijing, a city bristling with preparations for the 2008 Olympics. Abercrombie & Kent Tour Director Bill Hurst accompanies you, along with Nick Bonner, an expert on North Korea and Beijing resident. Nick has produced three award-winning films about North Korea, and his other talents include experience as a painter, cartoonist and landscape artist. The combined expertise of Bonner and Hurst provides invaluable insight to this closed society.

As it turns out, the footage for the popular music video by Faithless is actually drawn from Bonner’s documentary, A State of Mind, which tells the “story of two North Korean schoolgirls and their families in the lead up to the Mass Games – the biggest and most elaborate human performance on earth.”

“Nicknamed the Davy Crocket, it could take down more than bears…”

In a break from events on the Hill comes this darkly comical clip from the History Channel on the M65 “Davy Crocket” recoilless nuclear rifle.

Key lines: “If there were a military failed inventions hall of fame, there would surely be a place for the nuclear rifle, developed in the Cold War ‘60s, the M65. … The Davy Crocket was hampered by one nagging flaw. … Its maximum firing range of about 3 miles meant it couldn’t fire its payload beyond the radius of the resulting fallout.”

Especially disturbing is that the M65 handlers strangely resemble the New Wave band, Devo…

Vote Results on Amendments to the FY09 Defense Authorization Bill

In good news, the Pearce (NM) amendment on the Reliable Replacement Warhead failed 145-271, with 227 Democrats and 44 Republicans voting against the measure. (Roll No. 358) The amendment would “amend title XXXI (DOE National Security Programs) to remove $10 million in funding for energy conservation on military installations and increase funding for the Reliable Replacement Warhead program by $10 million.”

In bad news, the Tierney (MA) amendment on missile defense failed 122-292, with 117 Democrats and 5 Republicans voting in favor. (Roll No. 357) The amendment would “reduce funding for the Missile Defense Agency by $966.2 million. It would provide $75 million for the Cooperation Threat Reduction program, $592 million for the nonproliferation and WMD programs of the Energy Department, $30 million for impact aid to help local educational agencies provide support to dependents of service members, $30 million for family support of wounded service members, $30 million for suicide prevention programs for service members, and $10 million for a pilot program to identify and retrain wounded service members as military health professionals to treat other wounded service members. Any remaining funds would be used to fund National Guard and Reserve shortfalls, especially in connection with homeland security activities.”

In good news, the Franks (AZ) amendment on missile defense failed 186-229, with 215 Democrats and 14 Republicans voting against. (Roll No. 356) The amendment would “add $719 million to the Missile Defense Agency’s budget. This amendment directs the Department of Defense to utilize the $719 million for Theater High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, and Tests & Targets within the Missile Defense Agency account portfolio. The offset for the $719 million is to be determined by the Secretary of Defense from title II of the bill (Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation).”

The Spratt (SC) amendment on Iran’s nuclear weapons capabilities was agreed to by voice vote. The amendment “[r]equires the DNI, on an annual basis, to submit to Congress an update of the National Intelligence Estimate entitled "Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities" and dated November 2007. Such update may be submitted in classified form. The President shall notify Congress in writing within 15 days of determining that Iran has met or surpassed any major milestone in its nuclear weapons program or that Iran has undertaken to accelerate, decelerate, or cease the development of any significant element within its nuclear weapons program.”

There was no vote on the Schiff (CA) amendment on accidental nuclear launch. The amendment would “require the Defense Secretary to study methods to verifiably reduce the likelihood of accidental nuclear launch by any nation. The Secretary must report to Congress on the results of the study within 6 months.”

White House on the FY09 Defense Authorization Bill

The White House released its “Statement of Administration Policy” on the FY09 Defense Authorization bill today. Below are the relevant portions on Iran, missile defense, and RRW.

Iran: The Administration also strongly opposes any amendments that would restrict the ability of the United States to deal effectively with the threats to regional security posed by the conduct of Iran.

Missile Defense: The Administration strongly opposes the significant reduction of over $700 million to our missile defense programs, including European Missile Defense, Airborne Laser, the Multiple Kill Vehicle, and the Kinetic Energy Interceptor. In addition, the Administration strongly opposes any potential amendment that would impose even more dramatic reductions to missile defense funding. The Administration is particularly concerned with the reduction of $371 million for the European Missile Defense program, which could jeopardize the security of the United States and our European allies by delaying the fielding of missile defense assets to protect against the emerging missile threat posed by Iran.

Reliable Replacement Warhead: The Administration opposes the redirection of all funding requested for the Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration's Reliable Replacement Warhead program, which is needed to improve the security, reliability and maintainability of our aging nuclear stockpile.

Congress Announces Appointments to WMD and Terrorism Commission

Last Friday, Congressional leadership announced their appointments to the Commission on the Prevention of Weapons of Mass Destruction Proliferation and Terrorism.

The commission's creation was a recommendation of the independent 9/11 Commission. It is assigned to assess the United States' current non-proliferation and anti-terrorism efforts and provide a "clear comprehensive strategy" with "concrete recommendations" to achieve both goals.

Commission members are:

• Former Senator Bob Graham, Chairman (Chair, Graham Center for Public Service, University of Florida and University of Miami)
• Former Senator Jim Talent, Vice-Chairman (Distinguished Fellow, The Heritage Foundation)
• Former Congressman Timothy J. Roemer (President, Center for National Policy)
• Ambassador Wendy R. Sherman (Principal, The Albright Group LLC)
• Dr. Graham T. Allison (Director, Harvard University Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs)
• Mr. Richard Verma (Partner, Steptoe & Johnson, LLP)
• Mr. Henry Sokolski (Executive Director, Nonproliferation Policy Education Center)
• Mr. Stephen Rademaker (Senior Counsel, BGR Holding, LLC)
• Ms. Robin Cleveland, (Principal, Olivet Consulting, LLC)

In a report due in 180 days, the Committee is tasked to examine:

• Efforts to secure loose nukes and weapons-usable material
• U.S. and international efforts to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons and materials to terrorists and rogue states
• The role of various U.S. departments in these matters, and inter-agency coordination
• U.S. commitment to and cooperation with international regimes
• The threat of WMD proliferation to America and its allies
• The suggestions of the earlier Baker-Cutler Report

With the wealth of expertise and experience on this commission, it would be a shame for their report to fail to "step outside the box" in its analysis of and proposals for U.S. efforts - both unilateral and multilateral - to curb the proliferation of nukes and other WMD and to address problems of terrorism around the world.

For the most part, they're far enough outside of actual government work to avoid falling victim to some of its bureaucratic limitations, and to instead provide conceptual alternatives to addressing the problems of WMD and terrorism. In addition, they have the experience and credibility to offer specific ways in which these plans can be implemented. There's no down-playing the potential of this group's collective wisdom to help guide the next administration.

Amendments to the FY09 Defense Authorization Bill

Provided below is a list of relevant amendments permitted by the House Rules Committee to the FY09 Defense Authorization bill. Votes will likely come tomorrow.

4. Spratt (SC): 20 minutes of debate – Iran National Intelligence Estimate
Requires the DNI, on an annual basis, to submit to Congress an update of the National Intelligence Estimate entitled "Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities" and dated November 2007. Such update may be submitted in classified form. The President shall notify Congress in writing within 15 days of determining that Iran has met or surpassed any major milestone in its nuclear weapons program or that Iran has undertaken to accelerate, decelerate, or cease the development of any significant element within its nuclear weapons program.

6. Franks (AZ): 20 minutes - Missile defense increased
Would add $719 million to the Missile Defense Agency’s budget. This amendment directs the Department of Defense to utilize the $719 million for Theater High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, and Tests & Targets within the Missile Defense Agency account portfolio. The offset for the $719 million is to be determined by the Secretary of Defense from title II of the bill (Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation).

23. Tierney (MA): 20 minutes – Missile defense cut and transferred
Would reduce funding for the Missile Defense Agency by $966.2 million. It would provide $75 million for the Cooperation Threat Reduction program, $592 million for the nonproliferation and WMD programs of the Energy Department, $30 million for impact aid to help local educational agencies provide support to dependents of service members, $30 million for family support of wounded service members, $30 million for suicide prevention programs for service members, and $10 million for a pilot program to identify and retrain wounded service members as military health professionals to treat other wounded service members. Any remaining funds would be used to fund National Guard and Reserve shortfalls, especially in connection with homeland security activities.

33. Pearce (NM): 10 minutes – Reliable replacement warhead
Would amend title XXXI (DOE National Security Programs) to remove $10 million in funding for energy conservation on military installations and increase funding for the Reliable Replacement Warhead program by $10 million.

43. Schiff (CA): 5 minutes – accidental nuclear launch
Would require the Defense Secretary to study methods to verifiably reduce the likelihood of accidental nuclear launch by any nation. The Secretary must report to Congress on the results of the study within 6 months.

Potential Amendments to the FY09 Defense Authorization Bill Related to Iran, Missile Defense, and Nuclear Weapons

Provided below is a list of amendments related to Iran, missile defense, and nuclear weapons submitted to the House Rules Committee for the FY09 Defense Authorization bill. It is unclear which amendments the Committee will permit to be offered.

Iran

Franks (AZ), #53
States the Sense of Congress that the Department of Defense should develop and maintain a viable military option to prevent the Islamic Republic of Iran from successfully developing or deploying a nuclear weapons capability.

Spratt (SC), #128
Requires the DNI, on an annual basis, to submit to Congress an update of the National Intelligence Estimate entitled "Iran: Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities" and dated November 2007. Such update may be submitted in classified form. The President shall notify Congress in writing within 15 days of determining that Iran has met or surpassed any major milestone in its nuclear weapons program or that Iran has undertaken to accelerate, decelerate, or cease the development of any significant element within its nuclear weapons program.

Missile Defense

Bishop, Sanford (GA), #95
Would provide 180 days of transitional health care to those service members who separate honorably from active duty and agree to serve in the Guard or Selected Reserve at no charge to the service member. It would offset the cost by cutting $22 million from the Missile Defense Agency.

Franks (AZ), #52
Would add $719 million to the Missile Defense Agency’s budget. This amendment directs the Department of Defense to utilize the $719 million for Theater High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense, and Tests & Targets within the Missile Defense Agency account portfolio. The offset for the $719 million is to be determined by the Secretary of Defense from title II of the bill (Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation).

Franks (AZ), #54
Would add $300 million to the Missile Defense Agency’s budget for Theater High-Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) and Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense. The $300 million shall be divided between both programs in a manner deemed appropriate by the Department of Defense. The offset for the $300 million would be determined by the Secretary of Defense from accounts outside of the MDA portfolio of Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation accounts

Gonzalez (TX), #26
Would rename the “National Casualty Care Research Center” as the "National Casualty Care and Trauma Research Center.” It also changes the authorization level for this Center from $1 million to $5 million. The increase is offset by a $4 million reduction in the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense program.

Tierney (MA), #115
Would reduce funding for the Missile Defense Agency by $966.2 million. It would provide $75 million for the Cooperation Threat Reduction program, $592 million for the nonproliferation and WMD programs of the Energy Department, $30 million for impact aid to help local educational agencies provide support to dependents of service members, $30 million for family support of wounded service members, $30 million for suicide prevention programs for service members, and $10 million for a pilot program to identify and retrain wounded service members as military health professionals to treat other wounded service members. Any remaining funds would be used to fund National Guard and Reserve shortfalls, especially in connection with homeland security activities.

Tierney (MA), #116
Provides that it is the policy of the United States not to deploy any weapon system designed to intercept an intermediate-range or long-range ballistic missile until the Defense Secretary certifies to Congress that the weapon system has successfully demonstrated the ability to track, detect, and intercept a warhead launched by a facsimile of the missiles expected to be deploye

Nuclear Weapons

Pearce (NM), #39
Would amend title XXXI (DOE National Security Programs) to remove $10 million in funding for energy conservation on military installations and increase funding for the Reliable Replacement Warhead program by $10 million.

Pearce (NM), #40
Provides that of the $9.3 billion authorized for the DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration (title XXXI of the bill), the amount authorized for the directed stockpile is increased by $50 million, of which $35 million is for Pit Manufacturing and $15 million is for Pit Manufacturing Capability. The increase is offset by a $50 million reduction in funds for the Global Threat Reduction Initiative.

Schiff (CA), #13
Would require the Defense Secretary to study methods to verifiably reduce the likelihood of accidental nuclear launch by removing weapons of the United States, Russia, China, and others from hair-trigger alert. The Secretary must report to Congress on the results of the study within 6 months.

Schiff (CA), #14
Would require the Energy Secretary to prepare a research and development plan to prioritize research and development efforts at DOE and the national labs overseen by DOE. The plan should describe the technical capabilities required (1) to enable a robust nuclear forensic response to a nuclear explosion or interdiction of nuclear materials or weapons worldwide and (2) to develop an international database containing data on nuclear material to enable the attribution of nuclear material or weapons to their sources. DOE shall report to the congressional defense committees within 6 months on the plan and within 18 months on implementation of the plan

Nuke and Nonpro Highlights of House Armed Services Committee Action on the FY09 Defense Authorization Bill

The Center’s Chris Hellman and Travis Sharp put out their Analysis of House Armed Services Committee Action on the FY2009 Defense Authorization Bill (HR 5658) yesterday. The full analysis is available online and the press release is here.

The House Armed Services Committee (HASC) completed its markup of the Fiscal Year (FY) 2009 Defense Authorization bill (HR 5658) on May 15, 2008. HASC's marked up bill recommends an overall FY2009 authorization level of $601.4 billion, the amount requested by the administration. This $601.4 billion total includes $70 billion for ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and $531.4 billion for National Defense (function 050). Of the $531.4 billion slated for National Defense, $515.2 billion is for the Department of Defense (DOD) and $16.2 billion is for the Department of Energy's nuclear weapons activities.

The FY2009 Defense Authorization bill is expected to come up for floor consideration in the House on May 22. The Senate Armed Services Committee completed its markup of its version of the FY2009 Defense Authorization bill on May 1. The full Senate is expected to consider its version of the bill sometime in June.

Included below are highlights, funding provisions, and legislative provisions relating to nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues.

BASE BUDGET HIGHLIGHTS

Prompt Global Strike – Fully funds the $118 million request for the "Prompt Global Strike" program, plus provides an additional $7 million under the program for the Army's Advanced Hypersonic Weapon.

Missile Defenses in Europe – The bill includes $341.2 million for Research & Development and Military Construction for long-range missile defense sites in Europe, $371 million below the request. The bill also restricts funding from being obligated until the governments of the Czech Republic and Poland have agreed to basing and status of forces agreements, and DOD certifies that the system has demonstrated a "high probability of working" through "operationally realistic flight testing." (For more information, see this and this Center analysis)

Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) – The bill does not authorize any of the Navy's $23.3 million request for RRW, but does redirect $13.3 million of the request for Arming, Fuzing, and Firing (AF&F) systems that could be used either for RRW or for an existing weapon refurbished through the Life Extension Program. The bill does not authorize any of the NNSA's $10 million request for RRW within Directed Stockpile Work, but it does add $10 million within Advanced Certification to address questions raised by the JASON review of RRW.

Nonproliferation Programs and Cooperative Threat Reduction – The bill includes $1.5 billion in funding for Department of Energy nonproliferation programs, $208 million above the request. The bill also includes $445.1 million in funding for DOD's CTR "Nunn-Lugar" program, $31 million above the request.

Global Threat Reduction Initiative – The bill includes $389.6 million in Department of Energy funding, $170 million above the request, for GTRI, a program that strengthens nuclear and radioactive material security worldwide.

MAJOR WEAPONS SYSTEMS

Ballistic Missile Defense
Request: $10.2 billion
Committee: $9.5 billion ($719 million below request)

NON-PROLIFERATION PROGRAMS

Department of Energy Nonproliferation Programs
Request: $1.247 billion
Committee: $1.455 billion ($208 million above request)

DOD Cooperative Threat Reduction Program ("Nunn-Lugar")
Request: $414.1 million
Committee: $445.1 million

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY NUCLEAR WEAPONS-RELATED ACTIVITIES

National Nuclear Security Administration
Request: $9.1 billion
Committee: $9.3 billion ($205 million above request)

Environmental and Other Defense Activities
Request: $6.9 billion
Committee: $6.9 billion ($28 million above request)

KEY POLICY PROVISIONS

Missile Defense Force Structure – The committee records that it "does not believe that the Missile Defense Agency has the appropriate expertise to set missile defense force structure requirements," adding that there is a "general lack of transparency and methodology." The committee directs the Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive plan for setting missile defense force structure and inventory requirements. The plan must include a clearer delineation of responsibilities within MDA as well as separate program element budget request numbers for each specific element within the Terminal Defense Segment and Ballistic Missile Defense Sensors.

Study of Boost Phase Missile Defense – Requires the Secretary of Defense to commission an independent assessment of the costs and benefits of boost phase missile defense. The study would be responsible for examining the Airborne Laser and the Kinetic Energy Interceptor programs, amongst others.

Report on Nuclear Weapons Inventory Control – Noting concerns over the inadvertent transfer of nuclear weapons from Minot AFB to Barksdale AFB in August 2007, and the discovery in March 2008 that nose cones for Minuteman III missiles were mistakenly shipped to Taiwan in 2006, the committee directs the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of Energy to jointly prepare a report on the steps the Department of Defense and the Department of Energy plan to take to address nuclear weapons inventory deficiencies.

Missile Defense Highlights of House Armed Services Committee Mark-Up of H.R. 5658

Last Wednesday (May 14), the House Armed Services Committee completed its mark-up of the FY 2009 National Defense Authorization Act (H.R. 5658). A summary of the bill can be found here and the full text of the bill can be found here. For a summary of the Senate Armed Services Committee’s mark-up, see here.

Under the leadership of Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO), and Ranking Member Duncan Hunter (R-CA), the Committee authorized approximately $10.2 billion for ballistic missile defense, a reduction of $719 million from the administration’s request and an increase of $212 million over the current year.

Noting the Bush administration’s overemphasis on the threat from long-range missiles and underemphasis on the real threat from short and medium-range missiles, the Committee increased funds for near-term missile defense capabilities (including $1.2 billion, an increase of $75 million, for the Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense system (Aegis), $939.9 million, an increase of $75 million, for the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile defense system, and $1.5 billion for Army missile defense programs, including the Patriot system) and slashed funds from systems designed to address longer-term threats (including $378.6 million for the Airborne Laser (ABL) program, a reduction of $42.6 million, $286.8 million for the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI), a reduction of $100 million, $254.4 million for the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program, a reduction of $100 million, and no funds for the proposed space test bed, a reduction of $10 million). The Committee also required that the Secretary of Defense contract with a Federally Funded Research and Development Center to conduct an independent assessment (to be completed within 90 days of the passage of H.R. 5658) examining the operational capabilities of ABL and KEI to counter short-, medium-, and intermediate-range ballistic missile threats in their boost phase.

Most dramatically, the Committee authorized $341.2 for the proposed long-range missile defense sites in Europe, a reduction of $370.8 million (including $232 million for research and development and $140 million for military construction) and an increase of $116 million over the current year. It also limited the availability of funds for the sites until the administration has certified the system’s effectiveness and the Polish and Czech parliaments have given their final approval of any deployment agreement negotiated with the United States. As Strategic Forces Subcommittee Chairwoman Ellen Tauscher (D-CA) put it, “we don’t believe the American people should be digging holes in Poland for a system that will eventually cost over $4 billion when we don’t have ratified and signed agreements with their government.”

The Committee’s action on the proposed European deployment was particularly significant in that it cut an additional $140 million from the Strategic Forces Subcommittee’s initial reduction of $232 million (recall that the Senate Armed Services Committee fully funded the administration’s request). Moreover, the condition that deployment and construction of the system cannot move forward until the Polish and Czech governments have given their approval will continue to give the Bush administration fits. The U.S.-Czech agreement has been delayed for the third month in a row and is now scheduled for sometime in June, while talks between the U.S. and Poland continue to flounder.

Not surprisingly, Skelton’s missile defense cuts did not sit well with the Republicans on the Committee. All told, three amendments were introduced in an attempt to restore cut funds. Strategic Forces Subcommittee Ranking Member Terry Everett (R-AL), offered an amendment to restore the funds that were cut from the European deployment, but it was defeated 34-24. Rep. Terry Franks (R-AZ), attempted to restore $100 million to the MKV program, but his amendment fell 34-25. Finally, Everett introduced a second amendment, which sought to authorize $5 million for a study on the costs and benefits of a space-based missile defense system. It failed 34-26.

All told, the Committee is to be commended for slashing and conditioning funds for a proposed deployment that, among other shortcomings, includes assets which have not been adequately tested, has yet to be agreed to by the host governments, is of dubious potential efficacy, and has exacerbated great-power relations with Russia

H.R. 5658 is scheduled to appear on the House floor May 21-22.

National Security Legislative Wrap-Up

With Congress headed into a Memorial Day recess at the end of the week, the pace of action on national security legislation has picked up. There is nothing like a deadline to force decisions.

Last week, the House of Representatives completed action on the Supplemental Appropriations bill to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and unexpectedly rejected new war funding. The Senate Appropriations Committee approved a similar supplemental bill, and the full Senate is expected to take action on the bill this week. Last week, the House Armed Services Committee completed its mark-up of the Fiscal Year 2009 Defense Authorization bill, and the full House has scheduled consideration this week.

This week, Congress may also vote on the Fiscal year 2009 Budget Resolution conference report and the Senate Armed Services Committee will hold a confirmation hearing on the nominations of Gen. David Petraeus to lead the U.S. Central Command and Lt. Gen. Raymond Odierno to command of U.S. forces in Iraq.

FISCAL YEAR 2008 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION BILL

On May 15, the House of Representatives took action on the Supplemental Appropriations bill (HR 2642) by approving two parts of the bill but rejecting funds for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also on May 15, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved by voice vote the Supplemental Appropriations bill. The Committee also approved three separate amendments: $169 billion for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan; more than $25 billion for new domestic spending; and provisions limiting the President’s authority to wage unrestrained war, including setting a goal for most U.S. troops to be out of Iraq by June 2009.

Along the way, the Committee added many provisions on a bi-partisan basis that the House did not consider. Among the Committee-approved provisions is one that provides incentives for Highly Enriched Uranium imports from Russia.

Two amendments were rejected after extensive debate:

• A Brownback (R-KS) amendment limiting a waiver of sanctions against North Korea to permit the U.S. to help North Korea dismantle its nuclear program failed 6 -23.

• An Allard (R-CO) amendment to permit oil shale mining was defeated 14 – 15.

The full Senate is expected to take up the bill this week. Majority Leader Harry Reid’s (D-NV) plan -- at least before the House defeated war funding -- was to bring the House-passed Supplemental Appropriations bill directly to the Senate floor, and then have the Appropriations Committee offer its bill as amendments to the House-passed bill. It is not clear whether this procedure will now be modified.

FISCAL YEAR 2009 DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL

On May 1, the Senate Armed Services Committee released its markup of the Fiscal Year 2009 Defense Authorization bill.

This bill, as reported to the full Senate by the Armed Services Committee, fully funds the administration’s $612.5 billion FY2009 national defense request, as did the FY2009 Budget Resolution passed by the Senate on March 13.

Noteworthy provisions in the Senate Armed Services Committee's marked up bill include:

• Retains the budget request for Reliable Replacement Warhead at the National Nuclear Security Administration, but reduces Navy RRW funding by $23 million.

• Adds more than $120 million for various nuclear nonproliferation efforts.

• Amends the Arms Export Control Act to provide limited waiver authority to allow the Departments of Energy and Defense to conduct work to denuclearize North Korea, and adds $50 million to NNSA for this work.

• Authorizes full funding for the administration’s $720 million request for the third missile defense site in Europe, but limits the use of funds for construction or deployment until two conditions are met: 1) the European government gives final approval (including parliamentary approval) of any deployment agreement negotiated with the United States; and 2) 45 days have elapsed after Congress receives the report required in the National Defense Authorization Act for FY2008.

• Prohibits using DOD funds authorized by the bill from being used for large-scale (defined as over $2 million) infrastructure projects in Iraq.

The full Senate is likely to consider the bill in June.

Early in the morning of May 15, the House Armed Services Committee approved by a vote of 61 – 0 the annual Defense Authorization bill (H.R. 5658). The bill authorizes $531.4 billion for the regular budget, plus an additional $70 billion as a down payment on next year’s costs for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, for a total of $601.4 billion.

Some of the major decisions include:

• Cut the $712 million request for a proposed third missile defense site in Europe by $371 million (Everett [R-AL] amendment to restore the funds rejected 24 - 34).

• Conditioned most of the spending on the third missile defense site on certification of the system’s effectiveness and approval of the plan by the Polish and Czech parliaments.

• Cut all $10 million for the Space Test Bed for space-based interceptor weapons (Everett (R-AL) amendment to restore $5 million to study the program rejected 26 - 33).

• Authorized $254.4 million for the Multiple Kill Vehicle missile defense system, a reduction of $100 million (Franks [R-AZ] amendment to restore the funds failed 25 - 34).

• Redirected $10 million in the National Nuclear Security Administration budget request for the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) and $23.2 million in the Navy budget for the RRW to other, higher priority activities.

• Authorized $445.1 million for the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, an increase of $31 million.

• Approved $1.5 million for Department of Energy non-proliferation programs, an increase of $215 million.

• Recommended $389.6 million for the Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI), an increase of $170 million.

The Committee rejected a Saxton (R-NJ) amendment setting a four percent Gross Domestic Product (GDP) planning figure for the Pentagon budget when it instead approved 34 - 27 a Spratt (D-SC) amendment stating that defense spending should be based on threats and security strategy.

The Committee also watered down a Hunter (R-CA) - Franks (R-AZ) amendment that would have required the Pentagon to develop and maintain a military option against Iran. The eventual amendment adopted by voice vote requires a Pentagon report on the full range of Middle East contingencies, including Iran and its nuclear facilities.

FISCAL YEAR 2009 BUDGET RESOLUTION

A House-Senate conference to resolve differences between the two versions of the Fiscal Year 2009 Budget Resolution has almost reached a deal in the week before the Memorial Day recess. The conferees agreed on a $3 trillion budget that is about $20 billion above President Bush's request. If the budget resolution is approved, it will be the first time since 2000.

NORTH KOREAN ASSISTANCE

On May 14, the House passed two bills by voice vote related to North Korea. One bill, H.R. 5834, increased refugee assistance and human rights and democracy-building programs in North Korea. The second bill, H.R. 5916, waived provisions in law that hindered U.S. assistance to North Korea in order to facilitate dismantling its nuclear plants. A similar provision is contained in the Senate version of the Supplemental Appropriations bill.

Earthquake May Affect Chinese Nuclear Weapons Complex

The 7.9 magnitude earthquake that rocked southwest China on Tuesday may have implications for China’s nuclear weapons complex, as recently highlighted by Jocelyn Ford on NPR’s Science Friday blog.

The quake’s destruction reached the nearby city of Mianyang where the Chinese Academy of Engineering Physics (CAEP), which includes the country’s nuclear weapons research, development and testing labs, is located. Dan Stillman, a former Los Alamos National Laboratory official, referred to CAEP in 2001 as “China's equivalent to our Los Alamos, Sandia, and Lawrence Livermore nuclear laboratories.”

An interesting aside, Stillman travelled to China multiple times during the 1990s, including numerous visits to nuclear weapons facilities, where he had extensive discussions with scientists, government officials, and nuclear weapons designers. He eventually produced a 500-page manuscript entitled “Inside China’s Nuclear Weapons Program,” but the book was later blocked by the CIA on the grounds that it contained classified information.

The distance between the epicenter of earthquake (as identified by the U.S. Geological Survey) and CAEP is approximately 90 miles (or 143 km). Provided below is an image using Google Earth to demonstrate the close proximity between the two. Click to enlarge.

A subsidiary of CAEP, the Institute of Nuclear Physics and Chemistry (INPC) includes a high-temperature and high-density plasma physics laboratory, a thermal-neutron experimental reactor, a pulsed fast neutron reactor, a high-power laser installation, and various accelerators.

The Xinhua News Agency reported earlier this week that, in addition to thousands killed and tens of thousands more under rubble, the quake had “caused serious damage to buildings, roads and telecommunications facilities in Mianyang.” It is fair to assume that some of this damage extended to CAEP facilities, especially considering that the Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection dispatched a 21-member team, including a number of nuclear safety experts, to assess the contamination risks.

Hobson’s Likely Successor, Rep. Zach Wamp, to Support RRW

Frank Munger of the Knoxville News Sentinel reports today that Rep. Zach Wamp (R-TN) would likely support the Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) program if he becomes ranking member of the House Energy and Water Development Appropriations Subcommittee next year as expected. Wamp would succeed Rep. David Hobson (R-OH), a leading GOP voice against RRW.

This is a disturbing, though not entirely surprising, move as the Oak Ridge National Laboratory and the Y-12 nuclear weapons plant are both located in Wamp’s district. The Y-12 plant has reportedly experienced problems refurbishing the same W76 warheads under the Life Extension Program that would be slated for replacement under the RRW program.

Munger reports that in an interview at Oak Ridge last week Wamp stated that he was a “team player” and cooperated with the subcommittee's chairmen, first Hobson and then Rep. Peter Visclosky (D-IN). “But,” Wamp went on to say, “I actually believe in the Reliable Replacement Warhead and that we've got to have the full arsenal. So, if I do move up on energy and water, I think on the weapon systems there may be some changes promoted by me on making sure we have the full deterrent."

Wamp's support for RRW would break the bipartisan opposition that has coalesced around the program in the subcommittee in recent years. It successfully led the way towards eliminating all funding for RRW last year, for instance. The president, however, is currently requesting $40 million in connection with the program.

National Security Legislative Wrap-up

Postponement is the name of the game. The House had planned to consider the Supplemental Appropriations bill to pay for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but postponed consideration until this week. The Senate Appropriations Committee was scheduled to consider the same bill last week, but delayed the mark-up to a new tentative date of May 15. The Senate had tentatively planned to consider the Fiscal Year Defense Authorization bill before the Memorial Day recess, but that consideration has apparently been put off until June. The House Armed Services Committee is scheduled to complete its mark-up on its version of the FY2009 Defense Authorization bill on May 14, with floor consideration expected the week of May 19.


FISCAL YEAR 2008 SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS BILL

The draft House Supplemental Appropriations bill uses the never-enacted fiscal year 2008 Military Construction-Veterans Administration Appropriations bill (HR 2642) as a vehicle or shell. House Democrats plan to offer the following three amendments:

Amendment 1:

• $162.6 billion to continue funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan well into 2009.

Amendment 2:

• A requirement to begin withdrawing troops from Iraq within 30 days of passage, with a goal of having all troops out of Iraq by December 31, 2009 (except those providing embassy security).
• A mandate that any unit deployed to Iraq must meet Pentagon requirements that it be "fully mission capable."
• A ban on permanent bases.
• An anti-torture provision that requires the CIA to comply with interrogation techniques in the Army Field Manual.
• A prohibition on using U.S. aid to rebuild towns or equip security forces in Iraq unless Baghdad matches every dollar spent. This is the functional equivalent of a 50 percent loan for Iraq reconstruction funding and ensures that the Iraqis provide funding up front.
• Prohibit extending the deployment in Iraq of U.S. forces beyond deployment time periods established in Pentagon policy.
• Prohibits the deployment to Iraq of U.S. forces that have not spent sufficient time between deployments "dwell time" at home station.
• Prohibit any agreement with the Government of Iraq committing the United States to deploy its forces in defense of Iraq or concerning the number or mission of U.S. forces in Iraq that is not in the form of a treaty subject to Senate ratification or otherwise specifically authorized by Congress.
• Prohibit any agreement with the Government of Iraq that would subject U.S. military personnel to the jurisdiction of Iraqi criminal courts or punishment under Iraqi law.
• Require that the President complete an agreement with Iraq so that United States Armed Forces operating in Iraq pay no more for fuel than the discounted price at which the Government of Iraq is providing fuel for domestic Iraqi consumption. --Extend the statute of limitations on criminal and civil statutes in cases involving fraud during wartime including in Iraq and Afghanistan from 3 years to 5 years.
• Amend the federal criminal code to prohibit profiteering and fraud involving a contract or the provision of goods or services in connection with a mission of the U.S. Government overseas. (This provision is identical to H.R. 400 which passed the House last year 375-3.)
• Expand the jurisdiction of the Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act - which only extends U.S. federal criminal jurisdiction to felony crimes committed overseas by contractors working for the Defense Department - to include contractors working for any US government agency.

Amendment 3:

• $1.2 billion for global food aid.
• $5.8 billion to repair levees in Louisiana.
• An additional $11 billion over 10 years for unemployment compensation.
• An expansion of education benefits for returning troops.
• Fully offset provision blocking seven Administration Medicaid regulations that will increase the cost of health care. (This provision is identical to H.R. 5613 which passed the House two weeks ago 349-62.)
• The President's requested funding level for State Department, USAID, and Justice Department operations and programs overseas.
• Increased funding over the President's request to fully fund military quality of life initiatives, such as BRAC requirements, military child care centers, and military hospital construction. (These items total around $2.2 billion).
• Sufficient funding to address urgent programmatic shortfalls acknowledged by the Administration, including increased costs for the Bureau of Prisons, due to increasing incarceration costs and growing inmate population, and decennial census cost overruns. While the House expects to act this week, the Senate schedule remains unclear.

FISCAL YEAR 2009 DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL

The House Armed Services Committee has completed its subcommittee mark-ups and the full committee mark-up is scheduled for May 14. Chairman Ike Skelton (D-MO) anticipates the bill will be on the House floor the week of May 19.

Highlights of House and Senate Committee Action on Missile Defense

There’s been a lot of action on missile defense funding in Congress over the past two weeks. The Senate Armed Services Committee and the House Strategic Forces Subcommittee completed their mark-ups of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2009 on April 30 and May 7, respectively. In what follows I will highlight the most important budget recommendations, and then conclude with my analysis of these recommendations.


S. 2787

Under the leadership of the Chairman Senator Bill Nelson (D-FL), and Ranking Member Jeff Sessions (R-AL), the Senate Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee mark-up added more than $270 million for near-term missile defense capabilities. The Subcommittee offset these funding additions, and provided offsets for other high priority programs, with reductions to lower priority or longer term missile defense programs, including, for example, the Airborne Laser (ABL), the Multiple Kill Vehicles (MKV) program, the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) program, and $10 million (the full requested amount) for the proposed Space Test-bed.

In addition, the Subcommittee fully funded the administration’s $720 billion budget request for the proposed European missile defense deployment. However, use of these funds for construction or deployment of a European missile defense system is prohibited until two conditions are met: (1) the European government gives final approval (including parliamentary approval) of any deployment agreement negotiated with the United States; and (2) 45 days have elapsed after Congress receives the report required in the FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Act, which requires an independent assessment of the proposed European deployment and a second independent analysis of missile defense options in Europe before site construction and activation can begin.

The mark-up also limits the use of funds for acquisition or deployment of the interceptor planned for Europe until the Secretary of Defense certifies that the interceptor has demonstrated a high probability of accomplishing its mission in an operationally effective manner.

Finally, S. 2787 requires the next administration to conduct a full review of U.S. ballistic missile defense policy, strategy, and related matters.

The Subcommittee’s markup was approved by the full Senate Armed Services Committee on April 30 and is slated to go to the Senate floor sometime later this month. The full text of the mark-up has yet to be released


H.R. 5658

Under the leadership of Chairwoman Ellen Tauscher (D-CA), and Ranking Member Terry Everett (R-AL), the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee mark-up authorized $10.1 billion dollars for missile defense programs, $719 million below the administration's request, but $212.6 million dollars above the current level. The mark-up provided $8.6 billion dollars for the Missile Defense Agency, a reduction of $719 million from the request, but roughly equal to current year funding.

Unlike the Senate Armed Services Committee, Tauscher’s Subcommittee chose to cut the administration’s $720 billion budget request for the proposed European missile defense deployment by $232 million. According to Tauscher, “The subcommittee made these cuts so that the third site can move forward far enough to determine if it’s the right platform to protect the American people….But not so far that we make long-term commitments to an untested system that doesn’t have the blessing of the host nations.”

In the same vein as the Senate Armed Services Committee, the House Panel extends the limitations contained in the FY 2008 National Defense Authorization Act on the availability of funds for the procurement, construction, and deployment of missile defenses in Europe. The mark-up also directs (1) the MDA Director and the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation to submit a jointly agreed plan for the testing of the European GMD component and (2) the Secretary of Defense to develop a comprehensive plan for setting future missile defense force structure and inventory requirements.

The full House Armed Services Committee could consider H.R. 5658 as early as next week, and the bill could appear on the House floor sometime during the week of May 19. The full text of the mark-up has yet to be released.


Analysis

First, the good news. Though critics of missile defense would like to see Congress drastically slash the approximately $10 billion that is annually devoted to missile defense, the current political environment is simply not amenable to such drastic cuts. Given this reality, all told, the actions taken in the Senate and in the House will come as reasonably good news to critics of the Bush administration’s missile defense plans, particularly its proposal for the deployment of interceptors in Poland and an accompanying radar in the Czech Republic.

While proportionally smaller than the reduction for FY 2008, Tauscher’s decision to lower the funding for the European deployment (last year it cut $160 million from the administration’s initial $310 million request) is once again an encouraging development. Ranking Member Everett vowed to fight the cut, though it doesn't seem likely that he will be able to significantly reverse it either in the full Committee markup or on the house floor.

The Senate and House Panels are also to be commended for continuing to condition the procurement, construction, and deployment of missile defenses in Europe on, among other requirements, final approval (including parliamentary approval) from the Czech and Polish governments and a certification from the U.S. defense secretary that the system would work “in an operationally effective manner.” These restrictions are likely to further delay the Bush administration’s deployment plans in light of the fact that (1) the signing of a U.S.-Czech treaty on missile defense has been delayed, (2) Poland and the U.S. continue to butt heads over Polish demands for support if it wants to place 10 missile interceptors in the country, and (3) both the Polish and Czech governments are likely to encounter strong resistance once they bring to their agreements with the U.S. to their respective legislatures and publics.

The bad news is that the Senate Armed Services Committee fully funded the Bush administration’s proposed European deployment. MDA praised the decision, calling it “a clear, unequivocal statement by the Democratic-controlled United States Senate that reflects endorsement of missile defense deployment.” While funds could still be cut by an amendment on the Senate floor or in conference, the Senate Panel’s decision is a significant setback, since last year the Committee cut the administration’s European request by $85 million.

Lt. Gen. Robert Gard: Nuclear Terrorism a Serious Threat

Lt. Gen. Robert Gard, a senior military fellow at the Center, had a terrific op-ed published in the Knoxville News Sentinel today. It comes on the heels of a Center outreach trip to Tennessee.

In the piece, Gard argues that when it comes to nuclear terrorism, the U.S. government has been walking when it should be running.

Gard concludes,

It is incredible that our government is failing to accord the highest priority to taking the actions necessary to prevent terrorists from carrying out their threat to detonate a nuclear weapon on the territory of the United States, which would forever change our way of life.

And where is the clamor from the body politic?

The full op-ed can be found here.

Business of the Bomb: The Modern Nuclear Marketplace

Mark Shapiro and Michael Montgomery of American RadioWorks recently put together an exceptional radio documentary entitled “Business of the Bomb: The Modern Nuclear Marketplace” which examines the “legitimate” side of the illicit networks that assist in nuclear proliferation, focusing on the A.Q. Khan network.

Below is a snippet to pique your interest:

… The popular image of desperate terrorists smuggling enriched uranium across borders may not be the most serious nuclear threat to the world. Instead, the people helping to make the bombs are often successful businessmen made even richer through illicit deals for making the machines to enrich uranium and build bombs. They may live in suburbs and belong to country clubs. And their ability to operate under the guise of "legitimate" business makes catching up with them far more difficult.

You can download an mp3 of the radio documentary, listen to it online, or read the transcript.

Congressional Schedule for DoD and DoE Bills

Provided below is an updated schedule of Congressional action on key Department of Defense (DoD) and Department of Energy (DoE) bills, as prepared by David Culp of FCNL.

Arms Control and Nonproliferation Highlights of the Bush Administration's FY2009 Budget Request

Reliable Replacement Warhead (RRW) Program

*FY2009 Request: $40 million for the Department of Energy, in three pots:
-Directed Stockpile Work: $10 million
-Science Campaign account: $20 million
-Engineering Campaign account: $10 million
*FY2008 Request: $88.8 million for the Department of Energy; $30 million for the Department of Defense
*Final FY2008 Action: $0 for the Department of Energy; $15 million for the Department of Defense


Advanced Fuel Cycle Initiative (the technology development element of the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership (GNEP))

*FY2009 Request: $301.5 million
*FY2008 Request: $405 million
*Final FY2008 Action: $179 million (as part of Department of Energy Appropriations)

Notable Nonproliferation Programs

Cooperative Threat Reduction (Nunn-Lugar Program)
*FY 2009 Request: $414.1 million
*FY 2008 Request: $348 million
*Final FY2008 Action: $428 million (as part of Department of Defense appropriations)

Global Threat Reduction Initiative (GTRI)
*FY 2009 Request: $219.6 million
*FY 2008 Request: $119.6 million
*Final FY2008 Action: $193.2 million (as part of Department of Energy appropriations)

International Nuclear Material Protection & Cooperation
*FY 2009 Request: $429.6 million
*FY 2008 Request: $371.7 million
*Final FY2008 Action: $624.5 million (as part of Department of Energy appropriations)


Space Test Bed (i.e. space-based missile defense)

*FY 2009 Request: $10 million
*FY 2008 Request: $10 million
*Final FY 2008 Action: $0

Conventional Trident Modification Program (to equip Trident II submarine-launched long-range missiles with non-nuclear warheads)

*FY 2009 Request: No longer a unique program – merged into Prompt Global Strike technology development program which requested $119 million (i.e. development of Trident-related technologies is set to continue)
*FY 2008 Request: $175 million
*Final FY 2008 Action: $0 ($100 million was appropriated solely for alternatives to the Conventional Trident Modification Program)

Missile Defense Programs

Total
*FY 2009 Request: $12.3 billion
*FY 2008 Request: $10.4 billion (as included in the scope of the FY 2008 Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 1585/S. 1547))
*Final FY 2008 Action: $10.1 billion (as included in the scope of the FY 2008 Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 1585/S. 1547))

European Ground-Based Defense (GMD) Element
*FY 2009 Request: $720 million
*FY 2008 Request: $310 million
*Final FY 2008 Action: $225 million

So-Called Programs to Promote Democracy in Iran (i.e. regime change slush fund)

*FY 2009 Request: $65 million
*FY 2008 Request: $108.71 million
*Final FY 2008 Action: $60 million (as part of Foreign Operations Appropriations)


Department of Defense (DoD)

Note: “National Defense” (also known as Function 050) includes the regular operations of the Department of Defense, the nuclear weapons and other defense-related programs of the Department of Energy, and the defense-related activities of other agencies, but excludes the cost of ongoing military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. The “base” budget (also known as Function 051) includes the regular operations of the Department of Defense only. “Supplemental War Funding” includes the cost of ongoing military operations in Afghanistan and Iraq.

National Defense (050)
*FY 2009 Request: $541 billion
*FY 2008 Request: $507 billion (as included in the scope of FY2008 Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 1585/S. 1547))
*Final FY 2008 Action: $506.9 billion (as included in the scope of FY2008 Defense Authorization Bill (H.R. 1585/S. 1547))

Base budget (051)
*FY 2009 Request: $515.4 billion
*FY 2008 Request: $452.2 billion (as included in the scope of FY 2008 Defense Appropriations Bill, H.R. 3222)
*Final FY 2008 Action: $448.7 billion (as included in the scope of FY 2008 Defense Appropriations Bill, H.R. 3222)

Supplemental War Funding
*FY 2009 Placeholder Request: $70 billion (an additional $102.9 billion from FY 2008
remains to be enacted)
*FY 2008 Request: $189.7 billion in Supplemental Appropriations requests
*FY 2008 Action To Date: $87 billion (including $70 billion for general military operations
and nearly $17 billion for Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicles)

Update: Question for Readers

Recently, yours truly posited a question for Nukes of Hazard readers regarding the Airborne Laser (ABL). At the April 16 House Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs hearing on missile defense (a summary can be found here), Philip Coyle claimed that "if the enemy paints their missiles with an ordinary white paint, a white paint that is 90% reflective to the [ariborne] laser, then 90% of the laser energy bounces off." Missile Defense Agency (MDA) spokesman Rich Lehner disputed this characterization, arguing that:

Regarding the paint, not true....That the U.S. would spend more than 4 billion on a weapon system that could be defeated by a coat of paint might make a good sitcom but has no basis in fact.

An anonymous commenter seemed to agree with Lehner, "the Airborne Laser is infrared, so color should have no effect on it."

At the most recent House Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs hearing on missile defense (a summary can be found here), Coyle stood by and expanded upon his earlier comments about the ABL. According to Coyle:

It would have been more accurate if the MDA Public Affairs Director had written, '...spend more than $8 billion on a weapon system that could be defeated...,' rather than '...spend more than $4 billion on a weapon system that could be defeated...' According to the GAO, if the Congress supports the MDA budget request through FY 2013 the ABL program would spend over $8 billion in 2008 constant dollars.

On the matter of the paint, Coyle noted:

...missiles painted with dark colors will absorb almost all of the laser energy and only 10% will be reflected. For missiles painted with an ordinary white paint, a white paint that is 90 percent reflective to the laser, 90 percent of the laser energy bounces off. Missiles with polished aluminum surfaces can reflect about 95% of the energy. Special coatings can raise reflectivity further, to 98% and more.

Coyle went on to argue that enemy missiles that rotate and the presence of "an ablative coating that burned off the outside of the enemy missile" could also compromise the effectiveness of the ABL.

Anyone have any further thoughts on this? I'm still waiting to hear from a few "experts" on this issue, so I'll be sure to report back what I find out.

Highlights of Third House Hearing on Missile Defense

Last Wednesday (April 30), the Subcommittee on National Security and Foreign Affairs held a hearing entitled, “Questions for the Missile Defense Agency: Oversight of Missile Defense (Part 3)” (A summary of Parts 1 and 2 can be found here and here, respectively). Wednesday’s hearing was the third in the Committee’s series on America’s missile defense program.

The witness list for the hearing was broken up into two panels. Panel 1 consisted of Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Director Lieutenant General Henry A. “Trey” Obering III while Panel 2 included Philip E. Coyle, III (Assistant Secretary of Defense and Director of Operational Test and Evaluation in the Department of Defense from 1994-2001), The Honorable Henry F. Cooper, Ph.D. (Chairman of the High Frontier organization), Mr. Joseph Cirincione (President of the Ploughshares Foundation). Their testimonies can be found here, here, here, and here, respectively.

This third hearing was particularly noteworthy since it gave the Subcommittee members a rare opportunity to raise important questions about missile defense in a public setting with MDA’s director. For the most part, the Democrats on the Subcommittee performed their oversight role well, aggressively questioning Obering on the technological feasibility, cost-effectiveness, and urgency of MDA’s programs and operations.

In what follows I want to summarize and then rebut three claims about missile defense made by General Obering during the hearing.

First, in its annual report on missile defense released in March of this year, the GAO determined that tests of the GMD element have not been undertaken in operationally realistic conditions. When asked about this finding by Rep. Paul Hodes (D-NH), Obering responded that he did not “agree in total with” the GAO’s conclusions, insisting that missile defense assets have in fact been tested in “operationally realistic” conditions. Obering did, however, admit that “the one condition that we did not have on the target was complex countermeasures, [but]…you don’t have to have complex countermeasures to be operationally realistic… You will for the future, but you don’t necessarily have to do that for today.”

Second, in response to a question from Rep. Betty McCollum (D-MN), Obering disputed Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates suggesting that taxpayers can expect to spend an additional $213 to $277 billion on missile defense between now and 2025 in addition to the over $120 billion that has already been spent to date. Said Obering: “They’re making assumptions about what we will continue, what we will not continue, that I don’t think are accurate.”

Third, Obering repeatedly argued that missile defense could strengthen deterrence by dissuading Iran and North Korea from further investing in ballistic missiles and/or using those weapons in a conflict.

On the issue of testing under operationally realistic conditions, Obering’s claims don’t add up. As Coyle noted in his opening testimony, MDA appears to want Congress “to believe that Iran (or North Korea) would be reckless enough to attack Europe, or the United States, with a single missile – with no decoys or countermeasures – and then sit back and wait for the consequences.” In reality, if Iran and North Korea were so reckless as to attack the United States or its allies, it would almost certainly do so with many missiles armed with decoys and countermeasures. What MDA usually fails to mention is that it could be decades away from conducting intercept tests against the type of decoys and countermeasures the intelligence community expects Iran and North Korea to soon be able to field.

On the issue of financial costs, it is more than a little hypocritical for Obering to be lecturing Congress about the future trajectory of missile defense. According to MDA, “there are currently no final or fixed architectures and set of requirements for the proposed BMDS.” Given that MDA has yet to flesh out any tangible operational criteria for success for the system, how can they claim with any degree of certainty that they know what the eventual costs will be?

Finally, on the issue of the impact of missile defense on deterrence, missile defense could, in theory, afford the U.S. greater latitude in achieving its goals vis a vis an adversary. Yet how much latitude is contingent on the effectiveness of our missile defenses, the odds that our adversaries would attack us with nuclear-armed ICBMs, the availability of other means to address enemy missile programs, and the impact of missile defense on great-power relations.

Given that (1) MDA is nowhere near the ability to field a missile defense system that can effectively deal with decoys and countermeasures, (2) Iran and North Korea are probably a decade (at the earliest) away from acquiring nuclear-armed ICBMs, (3) it would be easier for Iran and North Korea to attack us with WMD delivered via means other than an ICBM, (4) an over reliance on missile defense at the expense of diplomacy could encourage U.S. policymakers to take a more aggressive posture in crisis situations (thereby increasing the risks of instability and the probability of a nuclear attack on U.S. soil), and (5) U.S. missile defense plans have undermined U.S. strategic interests and international security by infuriating Russia and China, Obering is over exaggerating the utility of missile defense and obscuring its costs.