[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 93 (Thursday, June 8, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1190]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


            BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE THROUGH NAVY UPPER TIER

                                 ______


                         HON. ROBERT K. DORNAN

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                         Wednesday, June 7, 1995
  Mr. DORNAN. Mr. Speaker, a near-term defense against ballistic 
missile attack can be achieved by upgrading existing Navy AEGIS 
cruisers, destroyers, and standard missiles.
               [From the Wall St. Journal, June 5, 1995]

               Review and Outlook--Doable Missile Defense

       Opponents of defending America against missile attack have 
     long argued that (1) it can't be done and (2) even if it 
     could, it's too expensive. Meanwhile, proponents of missile 
     defense of late have been squabbling among themselves about 
     the pros and cons of their individual pet projects.
       But now, under the auspices of the Heritage Foundation, a 
     group of 16 eminent scientists and former military and 
     civilian Defense officials have put aside their differences 
     and joined to come up with a proposal that is doable and 
     affordable. Better yet, it would work.
       At the core of the Heritage Team B plan is an upgrade of 
     the Navy's Aegis air-defense system to allow it to shoot down 
     long-range and short-range ballistic missiles. The Aegis is a 
     shipboard radar-tracking and interceptor system that directs 
     surface-to-air missiles, also on ships, against enemy 
     aircraft and cruise missiles. It is intended for use in 
     combat theaters--for example, to defend the Marines from 
     attack as they storm a beach.
       The Navy is already working on an upgrade that would allow 
     it to intercept missiles outside the atmosphere, in the 
     ``upper tier.'' The Upper Tier system would also be for 
     theater use, though the upgrade would vastly expand the 
     territory it could protect. The Team B proposal calls for 
     Upper Tier to be upgraded even further, to shoot down 
     missiles of any range. Given such a capability, if Upper Tier 
     were deployed on ships scattered around the American coast, 
     it would provide a protective shield against strategic 
     missiles aimed at the U.S.
       And therein lies the rub. For, incredibly, the United 
     States has agreed not to defend itself against missile 
     attack. This was the mad promise made 23 years ago in the 
     Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with the Soviet Union. It is an 
     even more reckless pledge today considering the growing 
     threat of missile attack. A full upgrade of Upper Tier would 
     violate the ABM Treaty since it could be used to defend the 
     U.S. against attacks by strategic missiles.
       If we proceed along the current track, Frank Gaffney, a 
     former Reagan Defense official and a member of Team B, points 
     out that a Navy Aegis commander in the Sea of Japan would be 
     in the absurd position of being able to shoot down a missile 
     the North Koreans aim at Tokyo, but incapable of shooting 
     down one heading for Chicago. How on earth could it possibly 
     be in our national interest to dumb down the Upper Tier 
     system so that it can be used to protect our allies and our 
     troops abroad, but not one heading for our homeland?
       The experts on Team B say a fully upgraded Upper Tier 
     system could begin to be deployed in three years at a cost of 
     only about $1 billion. For a total cost of between $2 billion 
     and $3 billion, 650 interceptors could be deployed on 22 
     Aegis cruisers by 2001. The reason this is so cheap is that 
     the U.S. has already invested close to $50 billion in the 
     Aegis system; most of the necessary infrastructure is already 
     there.
       A fully upgraded Upper Tier alone wouldn't provide a 
     perfect national defense, but it's a start. Team B also wants 
     to expedite work on Brilliant Eyes, a space-based sensor 
     capable of detecting missile launches and tracking missiles 
     in flight. And it calls for putting more money into research 
     on space-based defenses, which in the long run are the most 
     effective and cheapest way to defend against missile attack.
       It is hardly controversial to assert that it won't be all 
     that many years before a pirate in a place like Baghdad or 
     Pyongyang gets hold of a nuclear bomb and the means with 
     which to deliver it. When that capability exists, it will of 
     course be too late to start slapping together a national 
     missile defense.
       The House National Security Committee took a step in the 
     right direction when it marked up a defense spending bill 
     that would authorize more money for Upper Tier, Brilliant 
     Eyes and missile defense in general. Similar legislation is 
     making its way through the House Armed Services Committee.
       That's the good news. The bad news is that the House bill 
     makes it clear that all this must be done within the confines 
     of the ABM Treaty. Even worse is the possibility that the ABM 
     Treaty might be expanded to cover some theater missile 
     defenses, as suggested in the agreement President Clinton 
     signed in Moscow earlier this month. Some Members of Congress 
     ought to ask their constituents whether they really want 
     their government to consciously retard its defensive 
     capability because of an antique Cold War treaty. It's now 
     time for this country's political establishment to admit that 
     future missile technology is likely to be carrying something 
     much nastier than communications satellites.
     

                          ____________________