[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 140 (Thursday, October 8, 1998)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1953-E1954]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                    NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. BOB SCHAFFER

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                       Wednesday, October 7, 1998

  Mr. BOB SCHAFFER of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, few Americans are aware 
that we have no reliable national missile defense system. If a foreign 
terroristic antagonist, one Saddam Hussein for example, were to launch 
a single ballistic missile at the North American continent, we would be 
defenseless to stop it, and it is wholly unlikely that we could 
accomplish the task.
  The President of the United States seems unconcerned about the 
matter, even though the technology currently exists to begin programs 
promising to effectively render nuclear missiles obsolete.
  To defend the President's irresponsible policies and actions, he has 
deployed the cover of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, 
General Henry H. Shelton. General Shelton has compromised national 
security to carry out his role as chief apologist for an incompetent 
Commander-in-Chief--President Clinton.
  Recently, General Shelton issued a communication to this Congress 
about the global threat of ballistic missile attack.
  Mr. Speaker, the Shelton letter was alarming, not only because it 
describes a very real threat, but because it is replete with 
inconsistencies, inaccuracies, contradictions and admissions all 
pointing to the obvious conclusion that Americans are today in danger.
  Today, I responded rather harshly to General Shelton's August 24 
letter to Congress. In composing this response, I consulted many 
colleagues. They share my concern, and my conclusions and have asked 
that the final draft be distributed to all Members.
  Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I hereby submit for the Record, the full text 
of the letter I have today posted to General Shelton. Furthermore, I am 
eager to join any Member who shares my outrage in this matter, in 
actively working to provide a reliable national missile defense system.

                                    Congress of the United States,


                                     House of Representatives.

                                                   October 7, 1998
     General Henry H. Shelton,
     Joint Chiefs of Staff, The Pentagon, Washington, DC.
       Dear General Shelton: Your letter to Congress of August 24 
     said you ``believed that North Korea continues moving closer 
     to initiation of a Taepo Dong 1 Medium Range Ballistic 
     Missile (MRBM) testing program.''
       One week later, on August 31, attempting to launch a 
     satellite, North Korea tested its Taepo Dong 1 Long Range 
     Ballistic Missile, a three-stage ballistic missile with an 
     estimated range of 3,000 to over 6,000 miles, or unlimited 
     range if used as a fractional orbital bombardment system.
       But the Intelligence Community failed to provide even a 
     day's notice of North Korea's Taepo Dong 1 ICBM test, or an 
     analysis of its purpose. The Intelligence Community certainly 
     can not provide a three-year warning of its ballistic missile 
     threat.
       The yardstick of adequate warning for missile tests is not, 
     and should not, be met in simply describing preparations for 
     missile tests as they unfold over the span of a few months, 
     weeks, or even days. Still, as premised in the obviously 
     flawed 3+3 policy, adequate strategic warning to implement 
     this policy entails predicting the appearance of new missile 
     systems years in advance. In order to prevent these new 
     emerging threats from becoming reality, the United States 
     must secure advantage of the greatest amount of time possible 
     to deploy missile defenses. Any delay threatens freedom.
       The Taepo Dong 1, furthermore, is a Long Range Ballistic 
     Missile, an ICBM, not a Medium Range Ballistic Missile as you 
     claim. North Korea's Taepo Dong 1 can threaten the United 
     States today.
       Your 3+3 ballistic missile defense program is 
     unconscionably leaving the American people vulnerable to 
     ballistic missile attack. We need a defense today against 
     long range ballistic missiles.
       Intelligence Community--The Intelligence Community failed 
     to accurately predict the capabilities of North Korea's 
     August 31 test of its Taepo Dong 1 long range ballistic 
     missile. The Intelligence Community failed to correctly 
     analyze North Korea's ballistic missile test.
       The Intelligence Community failed to anticipate and provide 
     timely and adequately warning of Pakistan's acquisition and 
     test of its Ghuari intermediate range ballistic missile. The 
     Intelligence Community failed to predict the resulting 
     nuclear tests and arms race between India and Pakistan.
       The Intelligence Community failed to provide adequate 
     warning of Iran's test of its Sahab-3 intermediate range 
     ballistic missile.
       You are relying for our defense on an Intelligence 
     Community that has repeatedly failed to predict and warn of 
     critical ballistic missile and nuclear arm developments.
       You are recklessly compromising the lives and safety of 
     tens of millions of Americans.
       Rumsfeld Commission--The unanimous conclusion of the 
     Rumsfeld Commission argues strongly and conclusively against 
     relying on the Intelligence Community for advance warning on 
     ballistic missile threats. You deny the conclusions of the 
     Rumsfeld Commission. But world events in 1998 have validated 
     the conclusions of the Rumsfeld Commission, and repudiate 
     your findings and perspective.
       The Rumsfeld Commission points out unconventional, high-
     risk development programs and foreign assistance can enable 
     rogue nations to acquire an ICBM capability in a short time, 
     and the Intelligence Community may not be able to detect 
     those efforts. You and the Joint Chiefs of Staff view that as 
     an unlikely development. But North Korea has already 
     developed and ICBM capability, disproving your view.
       The Proliferation Primer, A Majority Report of the 
     Subcommittee on International Security, Proliferation, and 
     Federal Services, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. 
     Senate, January 1998, describes at great lengths the foreign 
     assistance being given to rogue nations by Russia, China, 
     North Korea, and the United States for the development of 
     long range ballistic missiles.
       Your views on the threats we face from long range ballistic 
     missiles and rogue nations are without basis.
       Program--You suggest the 3+3 program is an unprecedented 
     effort to address the likely emergence of a rogue ICBM 
     threat, claiming it compresses what is normally a 6-12 
     year development program into 3 years, with additional 
     development concurrent with 3 year development.
       But we built the atomic bomb in 3 years. We put Polaris to 
     sea in 3.2 years. We built four ballistic missile systems. 
     Thor, Atlas, Titan, and Minuteman, concurrently in under 
     eight years.
       We can successfully build advanced technology weapons in 
     crash programs. Your 3+3 program under President Clinton, 
     rather than seeking to build a ballistic missile defense to 
     meet the threats which confront us, is needlessly 
     compromising the security of millions of American lives.
       Technology--You claim you have ``a prudent commitment to 
     provide absolutely the best technology when a threat warrants 
     development.'' Yet China threatened to attack the United 
     States by ballistic missile in 1996. North Korea can attack 
     us today. Russia can swiftly launch hundreds of long range 
     ballistic missiles against us. Where is our defense your 
     prudence dictates?
       You claim you want to provide the best technology for 
     ballistic missile defense, yet President Clinton canceled the 
     Brilliant Pebbles program in 1993, which would have deployed 
     advanced ballistic missile defenses today. President Clinton 
     cut the Space Based Laser technology program in 1993, an 
     advanced technology program which the Air Force now 
     advocates. President Clinton also cut programs for the 
     research and development of technology for ballistic missile 
     defense. Your claim is utterly false and preposterous.
       President Clinton dumbed down the Navy Theater Wide 
     ballistic missile defense program (Navy Upper Tier) to 
     restrict its use of target and cuing information, restrict 
     the speed of its interceptor, and restrict the capability of 
     its Kinetic Kill Vehicle. President Clinton is pursuing 
     ineffective and dumbed-down ballistic missile defense 
     technology. President Clinton is clearly not seeking 
     ``absolutely the best technology.''

[[Page E1954]]

       You are using the statement of ``absolutely the best 
     technology'' to delay the deployment of a strong and 
     effective ballistic missile defense. You are needlessly 
     placing the lives of tens of millions of Americans at risk of 
     destruction by long-range ballistic missiles. You are 
     attempting to deceive Congress.
       Additional Funding--You claim that additional funding of 
     ballistic missile defense programs will not buy back any time 
     in its already ``fast-paced schedule.'' You contradict the 
     Navy's report on its Theater Wide ballistic missile defense 
     program, which points out how additional funding can bring 
     development by 2002 rather than 2006. You contradict the 
     experience of the Space Based Laser program, where lack of 
     funding, especially under President Clinton, has restrained 
     progress. Your views are invalid.
       President Clinton is starving the funding of the Space 
     Based Lasers, precluding their deployment. President Clinton 
     canceled Brilliant Pebbles. Yet funding can revive those 
     programs. Still you deny the American people a defense 
     against long range ballistic missiles.
       ABM Treaty--You and the Chiefs of Staff believe adherence 
     to the ABM Treaty is consistent with our national security 
     interests. But the ABM Treaty invited the massive buildup of 
     the Soviet nuclear missiles, and the Soviet Union flagrantly 
     violated its provisions. You have been silent about these 
     violations of ``arms control'' agreements.
       Furthermore, in April 1991, Dr. Henry Kissinger, author of 
     the 1972 ABM Treaty, repudiated the treaty for being 
     inconsistent with our national security interests, writing, 
     ``Limitations on strategic defense will have to be 
     reconsidered in the light of the Gulf War experience. No 
     responsible leader can henceforth leave his civilian 
     population vulnerable.''
       You are irresponsible with American lives, leaving tens of 
     millions of Americans vulnerable to swift, massive 
     destruction by long-range ballistic missiles.
       Position of the Joint Chiefs of Staff--The Joint Chiefs of 
     Staff recommends the deployment of a ballistic missile 
     defense at 25 U.S. cities to save the lives of 30 to 50 
     million U.S. citizens. The Joint Chiefs of Staff believes it 
     is worthwhile deploying a ballistic missile defense to save 
     the lives of tens of millions of Americans.
       The Joint Chiefs of Staff believes that the deployment of a 
     ballistic missile defense will limit the ability of a 
     ballistic missile attack to damage our population, industry, 
     and military.
       The Joint Chiefs of Staff believes that the deployment of a 
     ballistic missile defense will provide the U.S. a strategic 
     advantage that will enable us to peacefully settle crises 
     around the world.
       These views of the Joint Chiefs of Staff for the deployment 
     of a ballistic missile defense, confident in our 
     technological ability to build an effective ballistic missile 
     defense, provide timely advice for Congress although made in 
     1966.
       In spite of the increasing dangers we face, and in spite of 
     the advances in ballistic missile defense technology we have 
     had in 32 years, you find the advice of the Joint Chiefs of 
     Staff to be without merit.
       Summary--There is no substitute for a strong defense 
     against long-range ballistic missiles. Your actions and 
     policy of leaving the American people undefended from long 
     range ballistic missiles is indefensible.
       Your letter presents Congress with more than a credibility 
     gap. Your leadership, the leadership of President Clinton and 
     his Administration, and the defense of the American people 
     are incompatible.
       You, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and President Clinton are 
     needlessly risking the lives of tens of millions of 
     Americans. You are inviting a nuclear Pearl Harbor. But the 
     defense of the American people from the threat of long-range 
     ballistic missiles will not admit delay.
       It is inconceivable, sir, to arrive at any other conclusion 
     but that you are culpable of dereliction of duty, leaving the 
     lives of tens of millions of Americans undefended from long-
     range ballistic missile attack.
       Your Commander-in-Chief President William Jefferson Clinton 
     and his assistant Vice-President Al Gore are also derelict in 
     their duty to defend American lives.
           Very truly yours,

                                                 Bob Schaffer,

                                               Member of Congress.

     

                          ____________________