Star Wars Made Real

Jack Hitt recently wrote an amazing story on the failures of missile defense for Rolling Stone. The tag-line of the article says it all: “The Shield Star Wars began as a Reagan-era fantasy. Under Bush, it is now the most expensive weapons system in the history of man. It has never been successfully tested. It will never be finished. And it is completely unnecessary.”

Included below are a few exceptional paragraphs:

The geopolitics of missile defense are every bit as troublesome as the science. Even the Missile Defense Agency concedes that the shield -- originally envisioned as a defense against a rival superpower -- is no longer of any use against China or Russia. A colorful brochure produced by the agency to make the case for expansion of the shield into Europe confesses that "Russia's large strategic offensive force could overwhelm the U.S. system's limited number of deployed interceptors." Even in a direct, one-on-one engagement, the brochure concedes, "U.S. interceptors in central Europe would not be capable of intercepting Russian ICBMs launched at the United States."

Having abandoned its superpower mission, the shield has morphed under Donald Rumsfeld into an all-purpose defense for the Age of Terrorism. For the last few years, the Bush administration has promoted the shield as protection against rogue states like North Korea and Iran. But the State Department recently reached a diplomatic agreement with North Korea that would eliminate its nuclear weapons program, and Iran is years away from developing nuclear capabilities. So whose warheads will the shield protect us from? In August, during a lecture at a missile defense convention, one proponent of the system suggested the possibility of a new ballistic threat from a country that currently possesses no missiles: Venezuela.

While America focuses on hypothetical threats, other nations are taking real-world actions in direct response to missile defense. Last year, China demonstrated its offensive capacity by "painting" one of our satellites with a laser -- the outer-space equivalent of sighting it with a rifle scope -- and earlier this year, the Chinese military demonstrated its might by blowing one of its own satellites out of the sky. The shield has also soured America's relations with Russia, which views our plans to install silos for interceptors in central Europe as the equivalent of the Cuban missile crisis. In response, Vladimir Putin has threatened to aim a new generation of missiles directly at the heart of Europe, and in July he withdrew from a treaty crafted by President George H.W. Bush that limits the number of troops and tanks Russia can position close to Europe.

This, to date, is the only real accomplishment of missile defense: The shield has effectively killed old arms-control treaties and ended deterrence. The arms race is back, only this time it's multilateral. China has officially chest-butted us in space, and Russia intends to aim missiles at Europe while massing troops at the borders of our allies. America, in return, gets the comfort of the shield.

Click here for the full story.

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.

Note: These dates are estimates and subject to delay.

Sen. Barack Obama to Urge Elimination of Nuclear Weapons, Part II

As mentioned earlier, Sen. Barack Obama gave a speech earlier today in which he laid out a plan to rid the world of nuclear weapons.

The highlights of the speech are provided below; the full transcript of the prepared speech is in the comments section. (HT to Plutonium Page). For some early thoughts, check out what Joe Klein had to say about the speech here.

When I said that we should take out high-level terrorists like Osama bin Laden if we have actionable intelligence about their whereabouts, I was lectured by legions of Iraq War supporters. They said we can’t take out bin Laden if the country he’s hiding in won’t. A few weeks later, the co-chairmen of the 9/11 Commission – Tom Kean and Lee Hamilton – agreed with my position. But few in Washington seemed to notice.

Some people made a different argument on this issue. They said we can take out bin Laden, we just can’t say that we will. I reject this. I am a candidate for President of the United States, and I believe that the American people have a right to know where I stand.

And when I said that we can rule out the use of nuclear weapons to take out a terrorist training camp, it was immediately branded a “gaffe” because I did not recite the conventional Washington-speak. But is there any military planner in the world who believes that we need to drop a nuclear bomb on a terrorist training camp?

[snip]

Make no mistake: we must always be prepared to use force to protect America. But the best way to keep America safe is not to threaten terrorists with nuclear weapons – it’s to keep nuclear weapons and nuclear materials away from terrorists. That’s why I’ve worked with Republican Senator Dick Lugar to pass a law accelerating our pursuit of loose nuclear materials. And that’s why I’ll lead a global effort to secure all loose nuclear materials during my first term in office.

But we need to do much more. We need to change our nuclear policy and our posture, which is still focused on deterring the Soviet Union – a country that doesn’t exist. Meanwhile, India and Pakistan and North Korea have joined the club of nuclear-armed nations, and Iran is knocking on the door. More nuclear weapons and more nuclear-armed nations mean more danger to us all.

Here’s what I’ll say as President: America seeks a world in which there are no nuclear weapons.

We will not pursue unilateral disarmament. As long as nuclear weapons exist, we’ll retain a strong nuclear deterrent. But we’ll keep our commitment under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty on the long road towards eliminating nuclear weapons. We’ll work with Russia to take U.S. and Russian ballistic missiles off hair-trigger alert, and to dramatically reduce the stockpiles of our nuclear weapons and material. We’ll start by seeking a global ban on the production of fissile material for weapons. And we’ll set a goal to expand the U.S.-Russian ban on intermediate-range missiles so that the agreement is global.

As we do this, we’ll be in a better position to lead the world in enforcing the rules of the road if we firmly abide by those rules. It’s time to stop giving countries like Iran and North Korea an excuse. It’s time for America to lead. When I’m President, we’ll strengthen the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty so that nations that don’t comply will automatically face strong international sanctions.

Analysis of Senate Appropriations Committee Action on the FY08 Defense Appropriations Bill

The Center’s Chris Hellman released his Analysis of Senate Appropriations Committee Action on the FY 2008 Defense Appropriations Bill (H.R. 3222) today.

The Senate Appropriations Committee completed its markup of the Fiscal Year 2008 Defense Appropriations bill on September 12. The bill includes $459.3 billion for the Department of Defense, $3.5 billion below the Bush Administration's request ($463.1 billion) and $39.7 billion above current levels (excluding supplemental appropriations bills). The full Senate may begin consideration of the legislation the week of October 1. The House completed consideration of its version of the legislation (H.R. 3222) on August 5.

Included below are some highlights relating to nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues.

Modifying Trident Submarines to Carry Conventional Warheads - Cuts entire administration request of $174.5 million, but includes $125 million to develop a new Prompt Global Strike capability.

Missile Defense - Provides $8.5 billion for missile defense, $310 million below the request, including an $85 million cut from the $310 million requested for the third missile defense site in Europe. Includes no funding for a Space Test Bed.

Cooperative Threat Reduction (Nunn-Lugar) - Provides $448 million, $100 million above the request and $76 million above current funding levels.

Chemical Weapons Destruction - Provides $1.52 billion for the Army's chemical munitions destruction program, $62 million above the amount requested by the Administration.

The complete analysis can be found here.

Sen. Barack Obama to Urge Elimination of Nuclear Weapons

“Senator Barack Obama will propose on Tuesday setting a goal of eliminating all nuclear weapons in the world, saying the United States should greatly reduce its stockpiles to lower the threat of nuclear terrorism,” the New York Times reports today.

I’ll put up the transcript of the speech when it becomes available. In the meantime, click here for more Obama on nuclear weapons.

Senate Passes Defense Authorization Bill

The Senate passed the Defense Authorization bill 92-3 last night with a number of important amendments. The Senate now turns to the Defense Appropriations bill.

Highlighted below are the major amendments related to nuclear weapons and nonproliferation issues that were considered.

Iran
Lieberman (I-CT), McCain, Kyl, Graham, Coleman, Collins, Sessions, Levin, Salazar and Craig modified amendment No. 2073 accusing Iran of assisting forces in Iraq that are contributing to the destabilization of Iraq and the murders of Americans, demanding that Iran cease those activities and requiring the Administration to report to Congress concerning Iran's activities there and responses to those activities was adopted 97 – 0 (July 11). The amendment closed with the sentence: “Nothing in this section shall be construed to authorize or otherwise speak to the use of Armed Forces against Iran.”

Protection against Iranian ballistic missiles
Sessions (R-AL) modified amendment No. 2024 stating that it should be the policy of the United States to develop and deploy, as soon as technologically possible, an effective defense against “the threat from Iran” was adopted 90 – 5 (July 12).

Chemical weapons destruction
Sens. McConnell (R-KY), Salazar, Allard and Bunning filed amendment No. 2062 to increase funding for chemical weapons demilitarization at Blue Grass Army Depot, Kentucky, and Pueblo Chemical Activity, Colorado, by $49.3 million was adopted by voice vote (September 18).

Nuclear terrorism
Sens. Clinton (D-NY) & Whitehouse (D-RI) amendment No. 2222, a version of her bill S. 1705, the Nuclear Terrorism Prevention Act, terrorism was adopted by voice vote (September 18). The measure would establish the position of “Senior Advisor to the President for the Prevention of Nuclear Terrorism” and urges the President to make the prevention of a nuclear terrorist attack on the United States of the highest priority and to accelerate programs, requesting additional funding as appropriate, to prevent nuclear terrorism.

Cost of replacing nuclear warheads
Sen. Bingaman (D-NM) amendment No. 2210 which would add to the nuclear posture review included in the Defense Authorization bill requirements that any plan for replacing or modifying the U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile include an assessment of the estimated cost and anticipated schedule for replacing warheads was adopted by voice vote (September 18). The amendment also requires reports in 2009, 2011 and 2013 instead of just 2007.

Iran
Kyl (R-AZ), Lieberman (I-CT), Coleman (R-MN) and Graham (R-SC) sense of the Senate amendment No. 3017 on Iran was approved 76 – 22 (September 26). The amendment was revised to take out approval of the use of force. After the use of force was deleted from the amendment, the provision urges the Iranian Revolutionary Corps be designated as a terrorist organization.

Retirement of B-52 bombers
Conrad (D-ND), Dorgan, Landrieu and Vitter amendments No. 2172 to require maintaining 63 B-52 bombers with 11 in reserve was adopted by voice vote (September 26).

Minuteman III missiles
Modified version of Hatch (R-UT) and Bennett (R-UT) amendment No. 3016 to require a study on the industrial base for solid rocket motors was adopted by voice vote (Sept. 26) (rather than a study of the Minuteman III missile).

Minuteman missiles
Baucus (D-MT) – Tester (D-MT) amendment No. 2325 barring the retirement of more than 40 Minuteman missiles from the Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana until a report from the Secretary of Defense was approved by voice vote (Oct. 1).

Annual U.S. Security Spending: $1 Trillion???

Center Military Policy Fellow Chris Hellman has a new analysis up over on his blog, Security Matters. I've pasted the full post below; head to the Center website for Chris's full look at the numbers.


Annual U.S. Security Spending: $1 Trillion???
By Chris Hellman
Monday, October 1, 2007

Today marks the beginning of the new fiscal year, and “closes the books” on fiscal year 2007 – a year when the United States spent nearly $1 trillion on security-related matters.

Back in February, 2006, the Bush administration requested, and Congress later approved, roughly $463 billion for the military. But this figure didn’t include almost $175 billion appropriated for the Pentagon in FY 2007 to cover the costs of military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. In addition to the almost $650 billion spent by the military on U.S. security, a new analysis I've done for the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation details over $350 billion in other federal security spending.

Security spending outside the defense budget ranges from the small -- $421 million for “Non-Proliferation, Antiterrorism, Demining and Related Activities” in the Foreign Operations budget – to the very large – nearly $100 billion for interest on the national debt attributable to past Pentagon spending.

It includes some funding that is clearly related to U.S. national security such as veterans’ benefits ($73 billion) and homeland security ($43 billion), and some spending, like retirement benefits for former Pentagon civilian employees ($22.4 billion) that’s less clearly connected. It also includes intelligence funding, foreign military assistance, and the military space program.

And even THIS figure is incomplete. It doesn’t include, for instance, pay and benefits for non-DoD civilian federal employees working on security issues for the Department of Homeland Security, State Department, or Department of Justice or Treasury. Nor does it include the costs of past debt accrued paying veterans’ benefits, retirees’ pensions, etc. It doesn’t include the majority of the State Department’s operating budget, although one must assume that SOME of our government’s diplomatic initiatives are directed at promoting U.S. security.

Former Senator Everett Dirksen is often credited with saying, regarding federal spending, that "a billion here and a billion there, and soon you're talking real money." In a $2.8 trillion annual federal budget, $1 trillion in security spending IS real money.

National Security Legislative Wrap-up, September 24-28 2007

Last week, Congress passed and sent to the President a Continuing Resolution, a bill to provide temporary funding early in a fiscal year when Congress has not completed funding on appropriations bills. The Continuing Resolution expires on November 16. The Senate is expected to complete consideration of the Defense Authorization Bill on Monday and to take up the Defense Appropriations Bill later in the week. The House may take up Iraq bills this week, including H.R. 3087, the Abercrombie (D-HI) - Tanner (D-TN) bill requiring the President to submit a comprehensive redeployment strategy within 60 days.

KEY NATIONAL SECURITY BILLS IN 2007

- DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL:

The Kyl (R-AZ), Lieberman (I-CT) amendment urging the Iranian Revolutionary Corps be designated as a terrorist organization on Iran was approved 76 - 22, although language authorizing the use of force against Iranian forces was deleted. The Senate is expected to complete consideration of the bill this week.

- DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS BILL:

The full Senate may consider the bill this week. The portion of the request to pay for the Iraq and Afghanistan wars -- which now reach $192 billion -- is not likely to be considered until October or November, or even early next year.