October • November 2006 • Vol. XXV No. 1 • An Arnold Publication

From the Editor—

A race I hate. . .

Ordinarily I love races, car races, boat races, track races, you name it. But when I woke up this morning and learned that North Korea may have successfully tested an underground nuclear bomb, I realized we were now involved in one kind of race I hate. . .the race between deployment of our Ballistic Missile Defense System and our enemies’ ability to launch a first strike nuclear attack. So, with my gut complaining nervously, I decided to see how the U. S. Missile Defense Agency is coming along. I took a quick look at the agency’s proposed 2007 budget submitted to congress. Here are a few excerpts from budget’s Introduction.

First Paragraph: “The Missile Defense Agency (MDA) is developing a Ballistic Missile Defense System (BMDS) to defend the United States, its deployed forces, friends and allies against ballistic missiles of all ranges and in all phases of flight.”

The Evolving Security Environment. “Proliferating and evolving ballistic missile systems and associated technologies and expertise continue to pose dangers to our national security. In 2005 there were more than seventy-five foreign ballistic missile launches around the world. Nearly sixty launches last year involved short-range ballistic missiles, approximately ten involved medium- and intermediate-range missiles, and about ten involved land- and sea-based long-range ballistic missiles.

“Iran, which continues to show interest in developing nuclear capabilities, and nuclear-capable North Korea have not relented in their pursuit of longer-range ballistic missiles. North Korea has the indigenously-developed 1,300 km No Dong Medium-Range Ballistic Missile (MRBM), which can threaten Japan, South Korea, and U.S. bases in the region. North Korea could test at any time the Taepo Dong-2 (TD-2) ICBM, which the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) assesses to be capable of reaching the U.S. with a nuclear weapon.

Initial Capability and Recent Successes. “In the latter part of 2005, we made major progress in developing and deploying both sensors and weapons. In November, we had a successful Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) intercept test and a successful Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) flight test. On December 13, we had a successful flight test of the Ground-Based Interceptor (GBI) in its operational configuration. We added a second Aegis BMD engagement cruiser to our force and emplaced two more Ground-Based Interceptors at Fort Greely, Alaska, bringing our total number of interceptors in Alaska to eight.”

“Our Airborne Laser achieved operational power for the full duration of a test and completed the initial flight tests while operating its beam control, fire control system on the heavily modified 747 aircraft. Finally, our Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI) team successfully built a mobile fire control prototype with direct downlink capability.”
So, we’re having some success, which is good and reassuring. . .sort of.

The good news in the budget was that Congress approved $8.7 million for 2007, an increase of 20%.

Still, I ask myself how many billions would it cost us if a nuclear strike against the United Stated succeeded. Look at what Katrina cost us.

Then I think, maybe our budget ought to be $15 or $20 billion, not just $8.7 billion. How much is defense of the country worth?

                                                                                C. H. Bush, editor