Toward U.S. Space Control: First, Undo Clinton’s Line Item Vetoes, Then Overturn the Short-sighted Policy Behind Them

(Washington, D.C.): On Friday, nearly one month after the Supreme Court
declared the line-item
veto to be unconstitutional, the Office of Management and Budget released $197 million
associated with 40 programs that had been vetoed by President Clinton last fall. Among these
programs are two that were explicitly struck for “policy reasons” — the Clementine II asteroid
intercept experiment and the Army’s Kinetic-Kill Anti-Satellite. The Administration’s opposition
to bringing such space control technologies to fruition was not explicitly cited in connection with
the third, the Military Space Plane, but nonetheless seemed to apply. Now that the
space
control-relevant line-items have been restored, it is time to reject Mr. Clinton’s seriously
flawed policy that animated them.

At the time of the vetoes, the Center for Security Policy characterized this policy as follows:

“These programs fall afoul of a core belief of those like Vice President Al
Gore, his
National Security Advisor, Leon Fuerth, [NSC staffer] Bob
Bell and other arms
control zealots, namely that space is not now and must not be ‘militarized.’ In
the
face of abundant evidence to the contrary, they insist on preventing the United States
from developing and fielding systems that will enable it to dominate what is likely to be
the future’s most important theater of operations. They demand that U.S. security be
based instead on demonstrably unverifiable and ineffective arms control agreements.” href=”#N_1_”>⁽¹⁾

Bothering Clinton with the Facts

The President and the Congress — which is now engaged in completing action on the defense
authorization and appropriations bills — should heed the advice offered in the wake of Mr.
Clinton’s line-item veto of these key space control technologies by forty-three distinguished
military leaders. They joined forces in an open letter to the President detailing the
absolute
necessity of maintaining America’s capability to deny our enemies the use of space. href=”#N_2_”>⁽²⁾

The signatories of this letter, including former members of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
Commanders-in-Chief (CINCs) and dozens of officers who hold major service and/or
Defense-wide commands, said in part:

“We can think of few challenges likely to pose a greater danger to our future
security posture than that of adversaries seeking to make hostile use of space — or
to deny us the ability to dominate that theater of operations.

“The stakes in this area were already clear six years ago. In Operation Desert
Storm, Coalition forces enjoyed the uncontested use of space-based assets. As a
result, they had a unique capability to assess and prevail on the battlefield. If the
enemy had the benefit of similar capabilities (or the means to deny us some or all
of these assets) that objective would have been achieved, if at all, with far greater
loss of American lives.

“What was true in 1991 will be even more so in the years ahead. Our experience
tells us that the contribution made to U.S. national security in the future by
space-based reconnaissance, communications, navigation and other systems will
only continue to grow. We agree wholeheartedly, moreover, with the National
Defense Panel in their conclusion that the decades to come will see great
advances in the abilities of potential adversaries to exploit space for
aggressive purposes and to interfere with our operations in outer space.”

The aforementioned, congressionally chartered National Defense Panel (NDP) declared
in
its report entitled Transforming Defense: National Security in the 21^st
Century that:
“Unrestricted use of space has become a major strategic interest of the United States”
and
that we must have “the capability to deny enemies the use of space.” The
blue-ribbon NDP
concluded that “space power is an integral part of the revolution in military affairs and a
key asset in achieving military advantage in information operations….The United States
cannot afford to lose the edge it now holds in military-related space operations.” href=”#N_3_”>⁽³⁾

The Bottom Line

The Center for Security Policy welcomes the restoration of the funds originally approved last
year
by Congress for these three space control programs. If, as seems likely, the Clinton
Administration’s arms control mafia refuses to adopt a policy consistent with the National
Defense Panel’s recommendations and those of the 43 distinguished military commanders
who authored the Open Letter of last January, however, the funds are unlikely to be used
as efficiently and as constructively as they should (even taking into account the lateness of
their becoming available to the program managers). Consequently, the Congress should
make
clear in its action on pending defense-related legislation the high priority it accords to the
realization of effective, near-term anti-satellite and its determination to see other space control
and space-based anti-missile capabilities realized as soon as technologically possible.

– 30 –

1. See Decision Brief entitled
Clinton Legacy Watch #8: Denying U.S. Military The Ability To
Dominate The Next, Critical Theater Of Operations — Space ( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=97-D_153″>No. 97-D 153, 15 October
1997).

2. See the Center’s Press Releases entitled
Required Reading: Center Issues Summary Of
Roundtable Discussion On The U.S. Requirement For Space Dominance ( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=98-P_16″>No. 98-P 16, 23
January 1998) and 43 Of The Nation’s Most Eminent Military Leaders Insist That
The U.S.
Must Be Able — And Allowed — To Dominate Outer Space ( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=98-P_07″>No. 98-P 07, 15 January 1998).

3. See Decision Brief entitled
National Defense Panel Implicitly Assails Clinton’s Decision To
Veto Programs Needed To ‘Deny Enemies The Use Of Space’ ( href=”index.jsp?section=papers&code=97-D_186″>No. 97-D 186, 3 December
1997).