New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 07:50am Jul 10, 2001 EST (#6824 of 6825)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

"But some experts say that the treaty is not clear on those issues, meaning disputes are likely to rage no matter what the administration does.

" "It is a question that doesn't have an answer," said Amy Woolf, a defense specialist for the Congressional Research Service, a nonpartisan agency of Congress, when she was asked if building a test site at Fort Greely would violate the treaty.

" "Whatever we say, the Russians are likely to disagree with," Ms. Woolf added. "It's a question of how you want to handle the political fallout from that."

. A Delicate Nuclear Balance by ANATOL LIEVEN http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/21/opinion/21LIEV.html

. Invitation to an Arms Race http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/20/opinion/20WED2.html

. Putin Says Russia Would Counter U.S. Shield by PATRICK E. TYLER http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/19/world/19RUSS.html

. Bush, Putin and the Missile Card http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/19/opinion/L19BUSH.html

. Just What Game Is Putin Playing? by PATRICK E. TYLER President Bush had seemed exuberant that he had created some momentum in Europe for his proposals when President Vladimir V. Putin shifted the ground under him. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/24/weekinreview/24TYLE.html

. Powell Dismisses Putin Warning on Missiles by THE NEW YORK TIMES .... Secretary of State Colin L. Powell is dismissing a warning from President Vladimir V. Putin that Russia will upgrade its nuclear weapon to counter the United States' missile shield. http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/24/world/24POWE.html

"Some powerful Democrats, including Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, have said they will oppose any defense appropriations that might violate the ABM Treaty. Mr. Levin's office said today that he had not received enough information about the Alaska proposal to know whether it would violate the treaty.

"In a sharp exchange during a committee hearing last month, .... Skeptical Senators Question Rumsfeld on Missile Defense by JAMES DAO http://www.nytimes.com/2001/06/22/politics/22MILI.html .... Mr. Levin repeatedly asked Mr. Rumsfeld whether any action in the 2002 budget might violate the treaty. Mr. Rumsfeld initially said no, but then qualified his answer.

" "One or more of the activities may — eventually will, the good Lord willing — run up against the treaty and be a violation," Mr. Rumsfeld said.

" "Before that happens," he continued, "we would have been in discussions with the Russians. And we fully intend that we would have fashioned some sort of a framework to move beyond the treaty."

This story ought to be evaluated in terms of the grossly inadequate technical performance of the missile defense programs.

rshowalter - 07:52am Jul 10, 2001 EST (#6825 of 6825)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

NYT -- follow on to story above today:

" Missile Test Is 1 for 2

"WHITE SANDS MISSILE RANGE, N.M., July 9 (AP) — The Pentagon reported partial success today in a test of the Patriot missile system, with one of its interceptors destroying a remote-controlled F-4 fighter plane that was using radar-jamming signals, while a second Patriot failed to hit an incoming missile.

"The F-4 test was the first time the Army had fired its latest-generation Patriot, the Pac-3, at a fighter airplane. The other Patriot test firing was aimed at a Hera target missile which was designed to simulate an incoming ballistic missile.

Comment: A decade after the Gulf War, when the Patriot was claimed to be operational but did not hit targets, the Patriot, after continuous development, is still missing tactical ballistic missiles without countermeasures --- and the military and contractors are reduced to firing at F-4's flying as drones, to show that Patriot can hit something. And these people are assuring us that their programs for much harder jobs will "mature quickly" -- and that we should fund a lasar program which they KNOW any adversary can easily render useless.

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense