[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 145 (1999), Part 12]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 16642-16643]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]



                   THEATER HIGH ALTITUDE AREA DEFENSE

                                 ______
                                 

                           HON. DOUG BEREUTER

                              of nebraska

                    in the house of representatives

                         Monday, July 19, 1999

  Mr. BEREUTER. Mr. Speaker, this Member commends this editorial from 
the July 15,

[[Page 16643]]

1999, Norfolk Daily News to his colleagues regarding the need for 
development of the Theater High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) in light 
of recent successful tests and North Korea's intention to launch a long 
range missile capable of reaching Alaska or Hawaii.

It Can Be Done--First ``Hit'' of Missile Intercept System an Indication 
                        the Technology Does Work

       In hindsight, it would appear that the media gave too 
     little coverage to a report several weeks ago that had U.S. 
     intelligence sources confirming that North Korea is preparing 
     a late-summer launch of its Taepo Dong 2 missile, an ICBM 
     capable of reaching Alaska or Hawaii. This will make North 
     Korea one of only a few countries above to strike U.S. soil 
     with long-range missiles.
       But what should be given even bigger coverage is the news 
     that the U.S. Army's new anti-missile system successfully 
     intercepted a target ballistic missile launched 120 miles 
     away in a test that was conducted last month.
       Without using an explosive warhead, the interceptor 
     destroyed the incoming missile by crashing into it at an 
     altitude of almost 60 miles. What's called the Theater High 
     Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) is designed, however, to defeat 
     intermediate-range missiles. That means it will not be able 
     to stop North Korea's Taepo Dong 2. But it proves that ``hit-
     to-kill'' technology can work, which is something critics of 
     missile defense have long denied.
       The challenge now is to build an effective defense against 
     long-range missiles that builds on THAAD's success. This will 
     require much more development and testing, and much more 
     support from Congress and the Clinton administration.
       The fact that it took the Army seven tests to score the 
     first THAAD ``hit'' is not an argument against missile 
     defense but an argument for investing more in anti-missile 
     technologies. It can be done, but it's a difficult 
     proposition.
       Unfortunately, the United States cannot make progress as 
     long as the Clinton administration observes the restrictions 
     of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. As a matter 
     of international law the treaty is defunct since the United 
     States' signing partner, the Soviet Union, ceased to exist in 
     1991. Misplaced devotion for the ABM Treaty hampers the 
     development, testing and deployment of certain kinds of 
     missile defense, ensuring that any system will be less 
     capable than it otherwise could be.

     

                          ____________________