Disarmament Diplomacy

Issue No. 56, April 2001

Missile Defence Debate Remains Intense as US Conducts Reviews

Editor's Note: on May 1, President Bush delivered a major speech on missile defence, calling for a new framework for strategic stability to replace the ABM Treaty. See Documents and Sources for the text of the President's remarks and a compilation of comment and reaction.

Summary

The US military is proceeding with the development and testing programme for missile defence systems intended to protect American territory, troops and allies from limited ballistic missile attack. The Bush administration is currently reviewing its overall national missile defence (NMD) - or, more simply, missile defence (MD) - strategy and deployment-preferences, but has made clear its determination to proceed with the project, despite widespread international scepticism and opposition, particularly from Russia and China.

On March 27, the Department of Defense announced that the next test-flight for a key missile-interceptor system would take place in early- to mid-summer. The system was last tested in July 2000, when it failed to hit an incoming missile. According to spokesperson Rear Admiral Craig Quigley, Integrated Flight Test No. 6 "is a near duplicate of last July's test, using just about identical components in every facet of the shot." Quigley added that a seventh test, using a new booster rocket developed by Boeing, was scheduled before the end of the year.

On April 2, Defense Week reported that the Pentagon now estimates the total costs of a full-scale NMD system as likely to exceed $100 billion, with $80 billion being accounted for by development and production in the 2001-2010 period.

US concern at the general, persistent reluctance of European states and other traditional allies to voice support for its basic position on missile defence was evident in remarks by President Bush at a joint press conference with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder in Washington on March 29. Asked if the matter was raised, Bush replied:

"Missile defence came up, you bet. ... I explained...to the Chancellor that we want to help folks think differently about the post-Cold war era. And we want to develop defences that are capable of defending ourselves; defences that are capable of defending others, who so choose to, against the true threats of the 21st Century. Russia is not our enemy. The true threat of the 21st Century are the extremists who can't stand what Germany or America believes in. ... I'll let the Chancellor speak for himself on his view. But I've found there to be somebody who is at least interested in our point of view, and for that I'm grateful."

Schroeder's response succinctly reflected the general international sensitivity to both the potentially destabilising impact of US plans, and to the willingness of the new administration to discuss those plans: "[I]n assessing such a comprehensive topic, we...have to look at things like the defensive potential that lies within a potential system. We have to see the potential up-side in terms of disarmament opportunities that might be in there. Obviously, we'll also have to look into lots of technical aspects, such as the threat scenario that is behind the whole system. Is it technologically feasible? Can we truly implement it? Who is going to be covered under the shelter? Who's going to be invited to be included by the shelter that we're going to build? What are going to be [the] repercussions for the global disarmament process...[and for] Russia and China, for example? These are all things that I think we need to think about and talk about in an ongoing process. And I can only say how very pleased, indeed, I was to see that the President declared himself ready for an open, ongoing discussion about all of these things." In a March 29 joint statement, the two leaders noted: "Together we are resolved to undertake new efforts in countering the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and increasingly sophisticated missiles for their delivery. We agreed on the need for substantive bilateral consultations, as well as close consultations with other allies and interested parties. We will work together toward a post-Cold War strategy that increases our common security and that encompasses the appropriate mix of offensive and defensive systems, and that continues nuclear arms reductions and strengthens WMD and missile proliferation controls as well as counter-proliferation measures."

Earlier, on March 19, President Bush and Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori of Japan issued a statement expressing similar sentiments, while also noting "with satisfaction that the United States and Japan are already conducting cooperative research on ballistic missile defence technologies."

As part of its alternative vision of a Global Control System (GCS) to deal with missile proliferation issues primarily through diplomatic, arms control and other cooperative measures, Russia has been proposing consideration, subject to adequate threat assessment, of a limited European theatre missile defence system (see Disarmament Diplomacy Nos. 54 and 55). On April 3, Vice Admiral Valentin Kuznetsov, a senior Russian Defence Ministry official, expressed concern at the lack of response from NATO, which first received details of the 'Euroshield' proposal in late February: "I don't know why [they haven't responded]... Either they're afraid, or they haven't worked out their own attitude toward the document. We are ready to go to [NATO Headquarters in] Brussels at any moment." NATO officials have cautiously welcomed the Russian initiative, while expressing their own concern about its lack of detail. On April 10, Interfax published an interview on the proposal with a 'high-ranking official from the Russian General Staff'. According to the official, the anti-missile systems involved "must be highly prepared for action, mobile and coordinated", and "must be ready for rapid deployment to any area in Europe where the threat of missile attack might arise." Reports have suggested that Russia envisages a key role for its own S-300 air defence system and its successor, the S-400, now in final stages of development. The official added: "It would be appropriate to consider the establishment of a specialised joint centre for processing and making available information on missile launches with representatives of all the member states of a European anti-ballistic missile system..."

Statements & Comment

Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer, March 28: "I must say I find the arguments against [the missile shield] a little unconvincing, because it is only a defence system. This is a system to shoot down missiles, not kill people."

Canadian Foreign Minister John Manley, after touring the US-Canada North American Aerospace Defense (NORAD) Command in Colorado Springs, March 24: "It is clear that the US sees...[missile defence] as potentially a vehicle for increasing not just national and continental security, but also broader security... We've really been asked to do only one thing, not make our minds up until the administration has decided what it wants to do. ... We obviously have some concerns. We don't want to see it increase global insecurity or global tensions or create a new arms race, and I think all of us have been quite free about raising those concerns... I think this is very much an active process and I expect we'll be hearing more about it from the United States in fairly short order... It's not as though this is entirely theoretical... It is proceeding quickly to a point at which they will take a firm plan forward."

Lt. General George MacDonald, senior official in the Canadian Armed Forces, interview with Reuters, March 23: "Assuming the United States goes ahead with the system, I think a pragmatic approach to it would be for Canada to participate... If Canada has some concerns about NMD, we can obviously discuss and negotiate that... But I think that ultimately, if the United States is committed to proceed with this, then we in Canada should probably take advantage of our NORAD relationship and the benefits of being within the protected area. ... [If we don't participate,] who's to tell what the ultimate impact might be? I've said the relationship could well atrophy over time."

Canadian Defence Minister Art Eggleton, Colorado Springs, March 24: "We are open-minded and looking for more information... I appreciate what General MacDonald says from the military context...but there are other contexts we have to look at as well..."

Hu Xiaodi, Ambassador of China to the CD, addressing the United Nations Disarmament Commission, New York, April 11: "[NMD] will severely hinder the international arms control and disarmament process and even trigger...a new arms race... [T]he country concerned will be more prone to act unilaterally and to use or threaten to use force in international affairs."

French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin, April 4: "[The Bush administration] does not seem to think that some rules, which make the international community work, need necessary be taken into account on certain issues [such as the Kyoto Protocol]... There are other issues that worry us as well, trade relations and the anti-missile system... This is not an isolationist administration, as has been the case before in the Republican tradition. This is more like a unilateralist administration..."

French Foreign Minister Hubert Vedrine, speaking at a joint press conference with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Washington, March 26: "The difficulty about this...[missile shield] is that one does not know at all how it works technically... One does not see very well what sort of menace it has to respond to."

Donald Anderson, Chair of the UK House of Commons Defence Select Committee, debate in parliament, March 15: "Refusing a request to use or upgrade [the] Fylingdales [radar facility in the north of England] would have profound implications for our important relationship with the US. We...have two choices: we protest, or we engage in dialogue with the new administration. Simple criticism of the US desire to defend itself against these threats will be wholly counterproductive. The starting point is that the US is a key friend and ally of this country... Nevertheless, friendship involves honest assessments and a willingness to find out the dangers. Perhaps we could propose there be a joint threat assessment by our own government and that of the US relating to the threat from 'rogue states'."

Note: in a Cabinet reshuffle announced on March 26, South Korean President Kim Dae-jung replaced Foreign Minister Lee Joung-binn, who had offered to resign after controversial remarks on March 23 alleging US diplomatic pressure on Seoul to support Washington's missile defence stance. Quoted in the Korea Herald, the Foreign Minister stated: "During the consultations to prepare for the Korea-US summit [in early March], the United States asked us to agree to their plan to promote the national missile defence system... We disagree, however, and the White House later announced it had not made any request..."

Reports: MP warns of acute dilemma over 'Star Wars', The Independent, March 16; Joint statement by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori, The White House, March 19; S. Korea says US asked for support on missile shield, Reuters, March 23; Canada says won't be rushed into missile defense, Reuters, March 24; Canada awaiting US missile details, Associated Press, March 24; Korea sacks foreign minister in Cabinet shake-up, Reuters, March 26; Powell - defense plan will aid allies, Associated Press, March 26; Defense Department Report, Tuesday, March 27, US State Department (Washington File), March 27; Downer wrong again on missile defence, Australian Peace Committee/Friends of the Earth Australia Press Release, March 28; N-shield no big deal for us - Downer, Sydney Morning Herald, March 28; Joint Statement by President George W. Bush and Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder on a Transatlantic Vision for the 21st Century, The White House, March 29; Remarks by the President and German Chancellor Schroeder in photo opportunity, The White House, March 29; US missile defense costs to exceed $100 billion, Defense Week, April 2; Russia's skeletal missile plan, Washington Post, April 3; France's Jospin criticizes Bush, Associated Press, April 4; Russia sees rapid anti-missile force - Interfax, Reuters, April 10; US missile defense plans attacked, Associated Press, April 11.