ABM Protection Needed

     The advanced military programs of irrational and terrorist states such as Iran and North Korea have made the need for defense against nuclear-armed missiles more crucial than ever.  In a recently published interview, NATO Secretary General Ramussen recently noted that thirty nations have acquired or are seeking to acquire ballistic missile technology.

    Recent technological achievements have made an effective deterrent against these weapons a reality. However, political and diplomatic obstacles stand in the way of developing a shield protecting the US and its allies.

    The House of Representatives included $100 million dollars for anti ballistic missile (ABM) development in its version of the 2013 Defense Appropriations Bill in May. The funds would be used to develop a missile defense site on America’s East Coast.  (Two other sites exist in Alaska and California.)  The new facility could become operational by 2015, employing 20 ground-based interceptors at a total cost of approximately $2 billion. However, it currently appears that neither the Senate nor the White House will go along.

    The Obama Administration and Congressional Democrats have been reluctant to implement missile defense. Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) is seeking to defund the ABM program and redirect the funds to domestic, nonmilitary programs.  The President’s opposition has been longstanding.  In 2001, then-State Senator Obama stated that he was opposed to missile defense; as a candidate for president, he pledged to eliminate funding for it. He continues to advocate the slashing of funding and implementation plans for ABM systems, and is committed to completely prevent any space-related ABM plans.

    The opposition has resulted in significant embarrassment for the White House.  Plans to move ahead with limited ABM protection against an Iranian threat to Europe were a successful product of extensive negotiations between the Bush Administration and Eastern Europe.  Former Soviet satellites in Eastern Europe, where key ABM elements would be based, had to endure a war of words from Moscow, which has persistently opposed any NATO self-protection measures.  

   However, President Obama proclaimed on Sept. 17, 2009, that he was unilaterally stopping the plan. The date he announced this was the 70^th anniversary of the Soviet invasion of Poland. The President’s decision infuriated Warsaw’s leaders, who had to expend significant political capital to gain approval from their voters.  The resulting loss of Eastern Europe’s trust in the White House directly led to the Czech Republic’s withdrawal from related agreements.

   Thus far, Moscow has not been able to dissuade NATO from support for ABM protection.  In an interesting development, Bloomberg News recently reported that even France’s new socialist-minded President Francois Hollande has solidly backed missile defense.

   The second major White House embarrassment came in March.  At a meeting in South Korea at a global security summit, believing the microphones were off, Mr. Obama requested that Moscow delay discussions until after the presidential elections, when he would have “more flexibility.”

   Despite its opposition to American ABM efforts, Moscow has long been a leader in antimissile efforts. In 1962, the USSR initiated construction of the globe’s first operational ABM system, and engaged in a major upgrade in the late1970’s.  Its effectiveness, however, was not considered especially high, leading to Moscow’s fears that superior American technology would provide the U.S. with an advantage.  The Kremlin’s opposition has been fierce. The Associated Press reports that Russia’s top military officer, Chief of General Staff Nikolai Makarov threatened a pre-emptive strike on NATO missile defense facilities in Eastern Europe if they are built. 

   The U.S. and its allies urgently need protection from the actions of rogue nations like Iran and North Korea, as well as the more established threats from Russia and China. 

    COMACTA extends its sincere appreciation to the heroic current and former members of our armed forces on this Memorial Day, and to the families of those gave their lives in defense of our nation.