DOD News Briefing
Thursday, February 6, 1997 - 1 p.m.
Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen
Secretary Cohen:
And we're going to have a stronger ballistic missile defense program. We'll have some significant increases in the airborne laser program and the so-called THAAD program -- Theater High Altitude Area Defense, and the Navy theater-wide, and I'll talk about that in just a moment.
In this budget, we are going to accelerate the first unit equipped for THAAD from FY2006 to 2004. That is a significant improvement as far as getting that into the field itself. The budget figure is roughly $722 million that's been included for the THAAD program. Another $252 million will go for the Navy upper tier or Navy theater-wide. We're also going to accelerate the space missile tracking system, the first launch going from FY2006 to 2004. We have funding that will allow for former Secretary Perry's three-plus-three solution as far as the National Missile Defense system. Essentially, we are going to include funding in this budget that will allow the research and development to go forward as far as a National Missile Defense system, to conduct that research and development and come to the year 2000. At that time, we will call upon our Intelligence Community to give us the best analysis that we have of the nature of the threat that we will face at that time, and then make a determination as to whether or not we should go forward with an actual deployment of a ballistic missile defense system, a National Missile Defense system. This puts us, I think, on track as far as what Congress was seeking to do in the past, namely by mandating a deployment date in the year 2003. This would put us in a position to do that if the threat at that time would warrant us going forward.
I think we will satisfy those who are interested in this particular matter -- as I am and was while I was a member of the Senate -- and I think this is a sound, responsible approach to it.
Out of the roughly $3.5 billion that will be included in the program -- out of that $3.5, you have roughly $2.7 will go for the Theater Missile Defense system, the balance going into the National Missile Defense system. We think that's a proper allocation of funding.
... ... ...
Q: As people here will tell you, I occasionally ask a one- or two-part question. And speaking of the budget, sir, the takeover of Boeing and McDonnell- Douglas, do you have any problem with that? And, secondly, there are reports that Saddam Hussein has been building up his SCUD missile arsenal. What do you and the President intend to do about it, if true?
A: I don't have any comment about the Boeing/McDonnell- Douglas matter. I have not focused on that in the last few days, so in light of what I said last week, obviously, there are consolidations taking place. They may be in the best interest of the country in terms of allowing our industries to produce products at a much more efficient rate, which is a benefit to the taxpayers of the country in addition to our national security, but I still want to examine those issues at the subcontractor- level, vertical integration, to see whether or not we're eliminating competition to the point where the taxpayer is not going to be well served.
I really don't have any comment about Saddam Hussein having acquired more SCUD missiles. I can assure you that we are fully prepared to deal with Saddam Hussein should he make any aggressive move toward Kuwait or anywhere else.
... ... ...
Q: On missile defense, why are you speeding up the THAAD and the sensor program? Are you going to oppose the Republican's National Missile Defense Bill, which they've reintroduced in a different form, calling for defense against a limited missile strike?
A: I favor defense against a limited missile strike. I've been in the forefront with Senator Nunn and others calling for a national missile defense capability against accidental launches, or a limited type of strike, in order to protect the people of this country, so, I don't disagree with that.
I think the program that we have -- the so-called three-plus- three -- will provide that kind of protection, and we're going to go forward with the research and development, and then make a decision at the end of that three-year period as to whether we go forward with a deployment, depending upon the intelligence; depending upon cost factors; the level of technology that we have; what type of dynamic might be set in motion should we decide to, number one, to have to renegotiate the ABM Treaty. All those factors will be considered at that time. So, I don't see us as being at odds on that question.
Q: How about the THAAD?
A: I think the near-term threat is going to be in the proliferation of ballistic missile technology. More and more nations are acquiring short-term missile technology and putting our troops and those of our allies at greater and greater risk. So, what we
want to do is to develop these theater systems and accelerating the scheduled introduction of this system from FY2006 to 2004, I think, will help meet that type of threat. So, that's the most immediate thing that we face, and that's why we put the money in for the acceleration of that.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
