*Source: DTN News / POLITICO
(NSI News Source Info) WASHINGTON, DC - September 11, 2009: Supporters of basing a U.S. missile defense system in Europe are trying to determine whether the words “under review” mean “all but dead.” 
A Standard Missile-3 is launched from the guided-missile destroyer Hopper on July 30 in the latest Missile Defense Agency test in conjunction with the Navy. The missile intercepted a short-range ballistic missile target launched a few minutes earlier from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. It was the 19th successful intercept in 23 at-sea firings by the Missile Defense Agency's Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Program, the sea-based element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System.
The Obama administration is expected to wrap up its examination of the nation’s ballistic missile defense programs this month, including the controversial proposal to place a missile defense system in Europe that NATO and some governments there embrace over the strong opposition of their citizens.
While arms control advocates are eager for President Barack Obama to end the effort that was a signature defense initiative of President George W. Bush, they’re reluctant to read too much into a trail of actions that seem to point toward canceling the program, which calls for missile interceptors in Poland and a radar site in the Czech Republic.
“Certainly the Bush administration was very enthusiastic, and the Obama administration is less so,” said John Isaacs, executive director of Council for a Livable World. He didn’t mince words about his own preference: “I hope they kill the system.”
Defense industry insiders also are reading tea leaves and largely coming away with a feeling of doom. Here are a few reasons why:
• The initial outpouring of love for European missile defense from the administration, the military and supporters in Congress has dried up. Even its biggest boosters have fallen silent.
Shortly after a Polish newspaper reported the U.S. would not proceed with the European sites, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley dismissed the article as “inaccurate.” Later, Marine Gen. James Jones, national security adviser, sought to reassure Polish officials about America’s “firm and unwavering commitment to Poland’s security and defense.”
For defense contractors, a commitment to Poland’s security is a far cry from putting U.S. missiles on the country’s soil.
The Pentagon’s brass, including Lt. Gen. Trey Obering, the former Missile Defense Agency director, used to be the missile program’s biggest backers.
But during a recent Space and Missile Defense Conference in Huntsville, Ala., the new powers-that-be at the Pentagon — including Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Lt. Gen. Patrick O’Reilly, director of the Missile Defense Agency — didn’t mention European missile defense. Not once.
“For those generals not to mention it, when they have every year for the last five or six years — they’re not going there,” said Riki Ellison, chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, who attended the conference.
And even champions on Capitol Hill, such as Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), have gone quiet, a defense lobbyist pointed out.
• Instead of continuing discussions about Bush’s plans for European missile defense, Pentagon officials are focusing on other options for defending Europe against missile attacks, such as combining sea-based Aegis destroyers with land-based missiles under development.
In the past year, the Navy has wholeheartedly embraced sea-based missile defense, setting up a new Air and Missile Defense Command in Dahlgren, Va., and adjusting its weapons investments accordingly.
Adm. Gary Roughead, chief of naval operations, laid the groundwork last year when he opted to stop making a next-generation destroyer in favor of outfitting an older model with a missile defense capability: the DDG-51. This year, the Navy is stepping up that effort, and Roughead has said the Navy could retrofit the entire fleet of Arleigh Burke destroyers with missile defense systems.
A Standard Missile-3 is launched from the guided-missile destroyer Hopper on July 30 in the latest Missile Defense Agency test in conjunction with the Navy. The missile intercepted a short-range ballistic missile target launched a few minutes earlier from the Pacific Missile Range Facility, Barking Sands, Kauai, Hawaii. It was the 19th successful intercept in 23 at-sea firings by the Missile Defense Agency's Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Program, the sea-based element of the Ballistic Missile Defense System.
The Obama administration is expected to wrap up its examination of the nation’s ballistic missile defense programs this month, including the controversial proposal to place a missile defense system in Europe that NATO and some governments there embrace over the strong opposition of their citizens.
While arms control advocates are eager for President Barack Obama to end the effort that was a signature defense initiative of President George W. Bush, they’re reluctant to read too much into a trail of actions that seem to point toward canceling the program, which calls for missile interceptors in Poland and a radar site in the Czech Republic.
“Certainly the Bush administration was very enthusiastic, and the Obama administration is less so,” said John Isaacs, executive director of Council for a Livable World. He didn’t mince words about his own preference: “I hope they kill the system.”
Defense industry insiders also are reading tea leaves and largely coming away with a feeling of doom. Here are a few reasons why:
• The initial outpouring of love for European missile defense from the administration, the military and supporters in Congress has dried up. Even its biggest boosters have fallen silent.
Shortly after a Polish newspaper reported the U.S. would not proceed with the European sites, State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley dismissed the article as “inaccurate.” Later, Marine Gen. James Jones, national security adviser, sought to reassure Polish officials about America’s “firm and unwavering commitment to Poland’s security and defense.”
For defense contractors, a commitment to Poland’s security is a far cry from putting U.S. missiles on the country’s soil.
The Pentagon’s brass, including Lt. Gen. Trey Obering, the former Missile Defense Agency director, used to be the missile program’s biggest backers.
But during a recent Space and Missile Defense Conference in Huntsville, Ala., the new powers-that-be at the Pentagon — including Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and Lt. Gen. Patrick O’Reilly, director of the Missile Defense Agency — didn’t mention European missile defense. Not once.
“For those generals not to mention it, when they have every year for the last five or six years — they’re not going there,” said Riki Ellison, chairman of the Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance, who attended the conference.
And even champions on Capitol Hill, such as Sens. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.), Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.), have gone quiet, a defense lobbyist pointed out.
• Instead of continuing discussions about Bush’s plans for European missile defense, Pentagon officials are focusing on other options for defending Europe against missile attacks, such as combining sea-based Aegis destroyers with land-based missiles under development.
In the past year, the Navy has wholeheartedly embraced sea-based missile defense, setting up a new Air and Missile Defense Command in Dahlgren, Va., and adjusting its weapons investments accordingly.
Adm. Gary Roughead, chief of naval operations, laid the groundwork last year when he opted to stop making a next-generation destroyer in favor of outfitting an older model with a missile defense capability: the DDG-51. This year, the Navy is stepping up that effort, and Roughead has said the Navy could retrofit the entire fleet of Arleigh Burke destroyers with missile defense systems.
No comments:
Post a Comment