Unfinished Business: Defending America

(Washington, D.C.): When the 105^th
Congress convenes next month, it will
inherit a major piece of unfinished
national security business: The
need to protect the American people,
their allies and troops overseas against
the growing danger of ballistic missile
attack.

The primary reason why this
unacceptable vulnerability remains to be
corrected in the next Congress is because
of the lack of leadership on this issue
exhibited over the past four years by
President Clinton and his first national
security team. Indeed, the nearly
exclusive focus of Administration efforts
to date concerning missile defenses has
been to encumber, slow down or
otherwise obstruct all efforts to deploy
effective anti-missile systems.

Clinton I’s Sorry Record on
Missile Defenses

For example, Clinton appointees in the
intelligence community continue to insist
that there is no threat that justifies
the prompt development and deployment of
missile defenses. That position is made
all the more untenable by testimony
recently given to the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence ⁽¹⁾
by two former Directors of Central
Intelligence. R. James Woolsey and Robert
Gates took strong exception to the 1995
National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that
provided the basis of the
Administration’s head-in-the-sand stance.
Specifically, they judged the methodology
used to produce the NIE was sufficiently
seriously flawed as to call into question
its value as a guide to policy-makers.

President Clinton also vetoed the
Fiscal Year 1996 Defense Authorization
bill, largely on the grounds that it
required action on building national
missile defenses. His Administration also
worked aggressively with like-minded
legislators to keep such statutory
direction from reaching his desk.

Arguably worst of all, however, Mr.
Clinton and his first national security
team went so far as to violate the
law in their efforts to prevent
significant progress from being made in
fielding needed U.S. missile defenses.
As the Center recently noted in
connection with the controversial
nomination of Anthony Lake to become the
fourth Director of Central Intelligence
in five years ⁽²⁾,
during his tenure as National Security
Advisor, the Administration has refused
to develop and deploy advanced theater
ballistic missile defense programs as
required by law. It has also refused to
comply with statutory direction
concerning amendments to the 1972
Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. The effect
of the latter violation could be to deny
the United States Senate its rightful
role in the treaty-making process and/or
to subject promising American theater
missile defenses to Russian and other
foreign vetoes.

Enter Jim Inhofe

As a result of this sorry record —
and the uncertain prospects that the
Clinton II national security team will be
any more responsive to the need for
defending America against missile attack
— the task of ending this Nation’s
dangerous vulnerability will likely
devolve to the Congress. Fortunately,
there are individuals who have
demonstrated a willingness to provide the
leadership that will be necessary to
convince both returning and new members
of the legislative branch that America
can and must be protected
against ballistic missile threats.

One such individual is Senator
James Inhofe (R-OK), who will be
an influential member of the Senate Armed
Services Committee and the Senate Select
Committee on Intelligence in the next
Congress. In the attached
op.ed. article which appeared in
yesterday’s Washington Times,
entitled “Missile Defense in Search
of Vision and Leadership,” Sen.
Inhofe makes a compelling argument in
favor of the prompt deployment of
effective missile defenses — and
demonstrates his determination to pursue
that objective once again in the 105^th
Congress. Highlights of this essay
include the following:

• “Who do we think we are
  kidding? What kind of
  close-minded silliness are we
  perpetrating on the American
  people? The threat — the
  capability to deliver devastating
  weapons by ballistic missiles —
  is here right now and it is
  growing daily. The answer is
  equally clear. We must get
  started in earnest to fulfill the
  highest responsibility of
  government bar none: to provide
  for the common defense.”

• “One of the most
  promising ways to do this would
  be to upgrade the capabilities of
  a portion of our Navy’s existing
  fleet of AEGIS cruisers.
  Our nation has already invested
  close to $50 billion in this
  incomparable defense asset. We do
  not have to start from scratch on
  a totally new system….These are
  not impossible or wildly
  expensive tasks, requiring
  undreamed of weapons or ideas.
  Such upgrades would be
  commonsense applications of
  existing technology, building
  upon the strength of the AEGIS
  system which is already in place,
  already bought and paid for. And
  we could do it for as little as
  $4 billion to $5 billion over
  five years — magnitudes less
  than the most commonly mentioned
  alternatives.” (Emphasis
  added.)

The Bottom Line

The
Center for Security Policy applauds
Senator Inhofe’s commitment to defending
the American people against missile
attack. The Center also welcomes
his recommendation concerning a technical
“way ahead” to begin providing
such a capability in a manner that
promises to be timely, militarily and
cost effective and widely supported by
U.S. taxpayers. It urges the new
members of President Clinton’s national
security team and the Congress that will
consider their appointments — and
oversee their actions if confirmed — to
use Senator Inhofe’s analysis as the
basis for fresh thinking and urgent
action to defend America.

– 30 –

1. See the Center’s
Transition Brief
entitled It Walks Like a
Duck…: Questions Persist That Clinton
CIA’s Missile Threat Estimate Was
Politically Motivated ( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=96-D_122″>No. 96-D 122, 4
December 1996).

2. See the Center’s
Transition Brief
entitled Why Tony Lake Is
Unfit — And Unlikely — To Be
The Next Director of Central Intelligence
(No. 96-D 129,
16 December 1996).