[Congressional Record Volume 159, Number 57 (Wednesday, April 24, 2013)]
[House]
[Pages H2254-H2255]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




          OUR NATION'S MISSILE DEFENSE ISN'T A BARGAINING CHIP

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Turner) for 5 minutes.
  Mr. TURNER. Mr. Speaker, once again, President Obama and his 
administration have offered up America's missile defense shield as a 
bargaining chip. Just the other week, Secretary of State John Kerry 
flew to China and offered to remove our recently added defenses in the 
Pacific to encourage them to counter the increasingly belligerent tone 
and actions by North Korea.
  This is the same failed strategy that the administration offered up 
to the Russians in exchange for them engaging with Iran. If it failed 
to work then, how could it possibly work now?
  At a time when our missile defense system is the only defense that we 
have to the threat from North Korea and the emerging threats from Iran, 
I am greatly concerned that our Nation's missile defense strategy is 
languishing. The end result is increased risk to the United States, 
increased cost to the taxpayer, and needless alienation of our allies.
  Our enemies around the world have sought nuclear weapons and missile 
technology, yet the Obama administration has consistently reduced 
missile defense funding, abandoned previous Bush administration 
strategies that sought to respond to these emerging threats, and has 
compromised the implementation of current missile defense programs. 
Meanwhile, they have sought elusive Russian, and now Chinese, approval 
of the right of the United States to defend itself.
  Most recently, the administration has abandoned its own missile 
defense strategy, known as the ``phased adaptive approach,'' in favor 
of a stopgap measure of finally placing the additional ground-based 
missiles in Alaska that they had previously canceled. I welcome the 
administration finally completing the missile field which it has 
attempted to close. Although, this reveals that they have no plan to 
reasonably respond to the real and foreseeable threats from North Korea 
and Iran.
  This announcement leaves the United States without an articulated 
missile defense strategy. This deficiency is compounded by the effects 
of the administration's clumsy handling of our relationship with our 
NATO allies. The abrupt cancellation of the Bush administration missile 
defense commitments, coupled with the announcement of the abandonment 
of the President's phased adaptive approach, have left our allies to 
stand alone in the face of domestic criticism and Russian opposition.
  Our relationship with the Polish Government has yet to fully recover, 
and I am concerned that this administration may repeat the same 
relationship-straining affront with our Romanian allies. The President 
and his administration must address the damage done to our 
relationships with our NATO allies as a result of their failed missile 
defense strategies.
  In addition, I am concerned that the administration fails to 
recognize the significance of the emerging threats

[[Page H2255]]

from North Korea and Iran which places the United States at risk. The 
administration should inform Congress of the effects of the abandoned 
and failed Obama administration phased adaptive approach and of their 
plan to complete the Bush administration's Alaska missile defense 
strategy.
  Further, since completion of the Alaska missile field alone is 
insufficient for the full protection of the United States, I am calling 
upon the administration to support the site selection and completion of 
a United States east coast missile field to complement the Alaska site.
  The world is not becoming a safer place. Offering to weaken our 
defenses in hopes of irrational nations suspending their weapons 
programs is not an effective strategy to protect the United States. 
Simply put, these offers are of greater benefit to our adversaries than 
to the protection of the American people. They are to the detriment of 
the American people.

                          ____________________