State Department's Role in Missile Defense
Paula A.DeSutter, Assistant Secretary for Verification, Compliance,and Implementation Remarks at the National DefenseUniversity Foundation Congressional Breakfast SeminarSeries Washington, DC April 4, 2006
[As prepared]
I'd like to thank my friend Peter Huessy, the NationalDefense University Foundation, and the National DefenseIndustrial Association for the opportunity to speak with youtoday about the State Department's role in Missile Defense and our highly successful international cooperative effortswith U.S. allies and friends. And, I would like to thankall of you for being here today.
State Department Role
First, you might be asking yourself why the AssistantSecretary for Verification, Compliance, and Implementationis here talking to you about missile defense. The reason isthat as a result of a re-organization within the "T" familyof Bureaus Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Under Secretary Robert Joseph recently transferred the MissileDefense portfolio to my Bureau of Verification, Compliance,and Implementation, hereafter "VCI" for short, in October2005. I find this to be a rather easy fit, since much of my job and the work of my Bureau is seeking to strengthendeterrence and to enforce commitments. Missile defense is anatural fit, in my opinion, because it not only enables usto strengthen deterrence, but also, should deterrence fail,to assertively strengthen it.
Having satisfied THATquestion, you may be asking yourself, what's the Departmentof State's role in Missile Defense? After all, we don'tbuild or fire defensive missiles (or offensive, for thatmatter), and in Washington terms, we're poor as church mice.But we do have an important role to play in this fieldabout which I'd like to say a few words.
Since the U.S.almost never fights alone, cooperation with allies andcoalition partners to develop and deploy missile defensesallow us to make effective use of the technological marvelsproduced by MDA. The most advanced of our allies will bringmissile defense-related sensors and interceptors to futurecombined operations. The use of overseas locations forsensors, ship basing, and potentially interceptors isalready important to plans for the defense of the U.S.homeland, and will be important for protecting our alliesand friends.
Such missile defense cooperation is vital inits own right, for the defensive benefits it provides inprotecting our populations and territory from attack byrogue states armed with ballistic missiles. But missiledefense is also an important nonproliferation tool, becausethe more defenses spread, the more unrewarding andunattractive it will be for would-be missile proliferatorsto invest in delivery systems which are unlikely to hittheir targets. Missile defenses, in other words, determissile proliferation. Should deterrence of these programsand their use fail, and if a rogue state launched ballisticmissiles perhaps tipped with chemical, biological, ornuclear weapons we would view missile defense as the"terminal phase counterproliferation."
Let me give you anidea of some of the work the Department of State is doing:
* The President has directed the State Department, alongwith the Department of Defense, to promote internationalMissile Defense cooperation and to negotiate appropriatearrangements for such Missile Defense cooperation.
* MyOffice of Missile Defense & Space Policy represents theDepartment of State on U.S. interagency delegations todiscuss Missile Defense cooperation with foreigngovernments worldwide. The Department of State also worksclosely with the Pentagon on all major international MD cooperation efforts. State supports the full range of workwithin NATO on bringing missile defense capabilities intothe Alliance. We have worked with our DoD counterpartsover the last two years to establish a formal militaryrequirement for missile defense, and supported the creationof a program office for creating the Active LayeredTheater Ballistic Defense System.
* In NATO MissileDefense-related efforts, the State Department represented the U.S. in the NATO working group that established, for thefirst time, an assessment of the risk to NATO from theevolving ballistic missile capabilities of rogue states.That assessment will be a key element of NATO decisions onany military requirement for missile defense to protect NATOpopulations and territory.
* The State Department alsoengages in public diplomacy overseas to build support formissile defense, delivering speeches on the subjectthroughout Europe, Asia, and Australia.
* The StateDepartment's Bureau of Political-Military Affairs is chargedwith controlling the export of defense articles andservices covered by the United States Munitions List. ThePolitical-Military Bureau's Directorate of Defense TradeControls carries out this mission through the International Traffic in Arms Regulations, also known as theITAR. These regulations are the means by which the StateDepartment implements the Arms Export Control Act.
*The International Security and Nonproliferation Bureau, andin particular its Office of Missile Threat Reduction,reviews export licenses and foreign military sales,including those for missile defense purposes, for nonproliferation concerns and to ensure that any approvedexports of equipment and technology are undertaken inkeeping with U.S. nonproliferation policy andinternational commitments including those under theMissile Technology Control Regime.
* The regionalbureaus in the Department of State support U.S. interagency working groups and delegations with critical insights aboutforeign government positions and the domestic conditionspotentially influencing its cooperative Missile Defenseefforts with the U.S., and, of course, they providerepresentatives to U.S. Delegations as necessary.
* MyBureau has an industry outreach effort that periodicallytalks to industry about Missile Defense programs andactivities, including international Missile Defensecooperation. We are planning to establish an industryroundtable forum to meet on a quarterly basis with the keyMissile Defense-related companies to exchange thoughts andideas on, for example, industry problems and obstaclesrelated to international cooperation that the Departmentof State might be helpful in resolving. At a minimum, we canhelp in explaining U.S. policy. For those in the audiencethat are interested in participating, you can contact myoffice for additional details.
Missile DefenseCooperation: The Rationale For Cooperation
The rationalefor Missile Defense cooperation arises naturally from the dramatically changing international security environment.Today, roughly two dozen countries, including some of theworld's least responsible states, possess ballisticmissiles and many are attempting to obtain missiles oflonger range. Many of these states also have nuclear,biological, and chemical weapons programs. The contemporaryand emerging missile threat from hostile states is fundamentally different from Cold War era threats, andconsequently necessitates a different approach todeterrence and additional tools for defending ourselves.The strategic logic used in deterring the Soviet Union maynot be applicable to deterring these post-Cold War threats,and thus the United States cannot stay solely dependent uponour capability to deter. Potentially, WMD and ballisticmeans for their delivery could allow such hostile states to pursue their objectives through force, coercion, andintimidation. Missile defenses are not a replacement for anoffensive capability, they constitute an additional andcritical dimension of contemporary deterrence, but ifdeterrence fails, Missile Defenses function as an insurancepolicy to defend the United States against ballisticmissiles launched against us.
Missile defenses will alsohelp to assure allies and friends about the credibility andreliability of America's commitments, and to dissuadecountries from pursuing either the indigenous development,or foreign acquisition, of ballistic missile technologiesor full-up ballistic missiles, by undermining theirmilitary utility. If Allies and friends were vulnerable to ahostile state's threatened use of WMD delivered by ballisticmissiles, Allies and friends might not join coalitions. Itis critically important to U.S. foreign policy to assureallies and friends that ballistic missile threats will not deter the U.S. from fulfilling its security commitments, norallow aggressors the means to undermine the cohesivenessand political stability of a coalition or alliance. Historyteaches us that, despite our best efforts, there will be military surprises, failures in diplomacy, intelligence, anddeterrence. Missile Defenses help provide protectionagainst such possible failures.
As permitted by the ABMTreaty, the U.S. gave notice in December 2001 of its intention to legally withdraw from that Treaty in order tobegin developing and deploying capabilities to protect thepopulation and territory of our fifty states. The Treatyterminated on June 13, 2002. As a result, the U.S. was criticized heavily by some in the international communityincluding by some allies and friends. Gradually, quite anumber of our allies and friends have recognized the threatthat, for example, North Korea and Iran pose to international peace and security and are modifying theirpositions, bringing them closer in line to ours,notwithstanding their earlier criticism.
An Example OfChanging Perceptions Among Allies And Friends
On January19th of this year in Brest, France, French President JacquesChirac delivered a major speech on French nuclear strategy.The speech noted that missile defense "cannot be asubstitute for deterrence. But it can supplement it byreducing our vulnerabilities." This adjustment in France'sposition is significant, since previously the threat ofnuclear retaliation to aggression had been judgedsufficient to deter the full range of threats.
Types OfMissile Defense Cooperation
In the May 20, 2002,"National Missile Defense Policy," President Bush directedthat the U.S. "structure the missile defense program in amanner that encourages industrial participation by friendsand allies, consistent with overall U.S. national security"and that "we will also promote international missiledefense cooperation." Regarding the interrelationshipbetween Missile Defense cooperation and U.S. export controllaws, regulations, and Missile Technology Control Regimeobligations, it is U.S. policy to implement our exportcontrol laws and regimes in such a manner so as not toimpede our cooperation on missile defense with othernations.
The U.S. has a wide range of MissileDefense-related efforts underway with foreign governments,involving,
* conducting joint Missile Defenserequirements and architecture analyses on acountry-by-country basis;
* joint modeling andsimulation exercises;
* joint research & developmentprojects;
* co-production;
* joint testing;
*joint training and/or interoperability exercises; and
*foreign military sales as well as commercial sales tofriends and allies.
These types of Missile Defensecooperation are being conducted, or discussed with Japan,the United Kingdom, Denmark, Australia, Israel, Italy,Germany, the Netherlands, and Russia, to name just a few.Cooperation can also take the form of "in-kind"contributions such as offering targets for Missile Defense testing, as well as offering to provide facilities and/orterritory for Missile Defense purposes. It's been less than4 years since the U.S. withdrew from the ABM Treaty in June2002, but the magnitude of MD cooperation with friends and allies has been, in my opinion, spectacular.
SelectedAreas of Missile Defense Cooperation
I'd like tohighlight a few selected areas of international cooperationin the field of Missile Defense.
Japan
Japan formallyreached a decision to deploy a multi-layered defensivesystem in December 2003, which will involve the purchase ofthe U.S. AEGIS BMD system and the Patriot PAC-3, as a"purely defensive measure to protect the lives and propertyof citizens of Japan" against ballistic missile attacks byrogue states. In addition to deploying PAC-3 interceptors,the Japanese Defense Agency also plans to equip MaritimeSelf-Defense Forces destroyers with SM-3 interceptors.
In the December 2004 Japanese National Defense ProgramOutline, which is a QDR-type of defense policy statement,missile defense was specifically identified as a necessarycapability. The statement explicitly identified equipmentand technology cooperation with the U.S. as a means ofdeveloping a Missile Defense capability. In December 2004,Japan and the U.S. signed a Framework Memorandum ofUnderstanding on Missile Defense cooperation.
In October2005, Secretaries Rice and Rumsfeld and their Japanesecounterparts released a major report on defensetransformation and realignment. The report calls for thedeployment of a U.S. Forward-Deployed X-band transportableradar to Japan. This deployment will complement not replaceour Aegis Long-Range Surveillance & Tracking destroyersalready stationed in the Sea of Japan and will providebenefits to both the U.S. and Japan. In addition, we arecurrently exploring other areas for Missile Defensecooperation, including cooperative development of nextgeneration interceptors. Recently, on March 8, the U.S. andJapan successfully completed a cooperative flight-test ofthe SM-3 with a modified, Japanese-designed, advancednosecone.
Australia
In December 2003, Australiaannounced its decision to participate in the U.S. MissileDefense program. Subsequently, the U.S. and Australia signedin July 2004, a Framework Memorandum of Understanding onMissile Defense Cooperation, and a Research & DevelopmentMoU was signed in October 2005. Three specific cooperativeprojects involving the Over-the-Horizon Radar, modelingand simulation, and fusion and tracking technologies arecurrently under discussion. On August 16, 2005, Canberraannounced it had chosen the U.S. firm Gibbs and Cox as thepreferred designer for their navy's air warfare destroyersworth up to $6Billion Australian Dollars. Three vessels arecurrently funded, with the first scheduled to beoperational in 2013. Each will be equipped with AEGISsensors and will be interoperable with the military forcesof the United States and with those of other futurecoalition partners. Although Australia may not currentlysee a ballistic missile threat to its territory, its purposefor pursuing bilateral U.S.-Australia Missile Defensecooperation is based on maintaining a close alliancerelationship with the United States and providing Australian industry with an opportunity for industrialcooperation and technology transfer.
NATO
Contractorfeasibility studies on Active Layered Theater BallisticMissile Defense were completed early in 2003 and a MissileDefense technical blueprint was established that NATODefense Ministers approved in June 2004. Since then NATOhas committed financial resources to developing andacquiring an operational command and control, planning, andexecution capability for the protection of deployedmilitary forces. By 2010, the Alliance expects to have thecapability to protect deployed military forces againstshort- and medium-range ballistic missiles.
NATO countryHeads of State and Government at the 2002 Prague Summitagreed to study options for protecting Alliance territoryand population against ballistic missile threats of allranges. NATO will be examining these missile defenseoptions based on a multinational contractor study.
NATO-Russia
NATO's cooperative efforts with Russia arebeing conducted in the Theater Missile Defense Ad HocWorking Group (AHWG) of the NATO-Russia Council, or NRC.Work to enable potential joint missile defense operationshas included a glossary of missile defense-relatedterminology in English, French and Russian, and thedevelopment of an Experimental Concept of Operations for usein joint crisis response operations.
This ExperimentalCONOPs was used in a NRC missile defense-related CommandPost Exercise/Simulation held in March 2004 at the JointNational Integration Center in Colorado Springs. A secondNATO-Russia Command Post Exercise was completed in TheNetherlands in March 2005.
Additionally, the Ad HocWorking Group is currently working on an "InteroperabilityStudy". Interoperability of NATO and Russian MD systems in the event our forces are deployed together as part of acoalition in an out-of-area, non-Article V operationis a useful goal.
Russia
The U.S. and Russia arecontinuing to talk about concrete cooperative projects inthe field of Missile Defense such as cooperation on targetsfor testing the U.S. BMD System and radar data sharing. TheU.S. and Russia conducted a fourth missile defense-relatedCommand Post Exercise simulation in Moscow in April 2005;the U.S. has proposed a fifth exercise later this month. TheU.S. and Russia are negotiating a Defense TechnicalCooperation Agreement, or DTCA, which would facilitategovernment-to-government, as well as industry-to-industry,Missile Defense cooperation. The USG is keeping Moscow informed about U.S. Missile Defense plans and programs inState-MFA and DoD-MoD channels.
Israel
Through thejointly funded U.S.-Israel ARROW II System ImprovementProgram, the U.S. is currently assisting Israel in upgradingthe performance of its operational Arrow system to give thesystem greater capability against longer-range threats ofgreater sophistication. Also, this program is aimed at facilitating interoperability with U.S. systems, and willprovide for periodic testing of the Arrow II system at aU.S. test range. For example, in July and August 2004, theIsraeli Arrow system and its Arrow II interceptors weretested from the Pt. Magu Sea Range in California. Finally,Boeing is co-producing components of the Arrow IIinterceptor for Israel.
Germany, Italy, and the U.S.
Germany, Italy, and the U.S. are jointly pursuing theMedium Extended Air Defense System, or MEADS. This R&Dproject is intended to develop a highly mobile MD system fordefending against short- to medium-range threats. MEADS isscheduled to be fielded in 2014 and would be a replacementfor Patriot.
Denmark
In August 2004, the United Statesand Denmark, including the Home Rule Government ofGreenland, signed agreements that permit upgrades to theU.S. early warning radar at Thule Air Base, Greenland.These upgrades will enhance our capability to detect anddefend against ballistic missile attacks launched from theMiddle East. A bilateral Framework Memorandum ofUnderstanding to facilitate missile defense cooperationbetween the United States and Denmark was signed in October2005. This agreement will allow Danish access to U.S. missile defense technologies and give Danish companiesbetter access to partnerships with U.S. companies in thedevelopment of missile defense technologies.
The UnitedKingdom
In February 2003, the U.K. agreed to the U.S.request to upgrade the early warning radar at Fylingdales,U.K., for Missile Defense purposes. Defense Minister Hoonand Defense Secretary Rumsfeld signed a Framework MoU onJune 12, 2003, which establishes the basis of the U.S.-U.K.industrial relationship in the field of missile defense. AnAnnex to the Framework MoU regarding the Fylingdales radarwas signed in December 2003, which delineates the roles and responsibilities of the U.S. and U.K. for the upgrades. A2nd Annex on bilateral Missile Defense-related RDT&E wassigned in October 2004. The U.S. has provided MissileDefense-related "situational awareness" displays to the U.K., which obviously reflects the closeness of ourrelationship.
European Missile Defense Site
Consistentwith the President's direction, the U.S. has been examiningoptions for enhancing both the defenses of the UnitedStates and of our allies and friends by deploying additionalmissile defense interceptors, sensors, and forward-basedradars.One of those options involves fielding a U.S. missiledefense interceptor site in Europe. The U.S. has conductedexploratory consultations with a number of NATO Alliesregarding their interest in hosting the deployment of U.S.Missile Defense assets. No U.S. decision has been reachedyet. We believe that the deployment of limited numbers ofMissile Defense interceptors in Europe would make asignificant contribution to the protection of the U.S. andEuropean NATO Allies from a Middle Eastern ballistic missilethreat.
Conclusion
In short, because of the continuedproliferation of weapons of mass destruction and theirballistic missile means of delivery, it has become clearthat the United States cannot rely solely on diplomacy,deterrence, arms control and non-proliferation regimes; wecan't continue to use 20th century tools to meet 21stcentury challenges. Given the growing list of bilateral andmultilateral Missile Defense cooperative efforts that arebeing pursued, it is also clear that our allies and friendsare also jettisoning the Cold War logic that vulnerabilityis stabilizing. Because Cold War-style deterrence is not sufficient, missile defense is a reasonable insurance policyto purchase in today's international security environment.We must work together to defend not only against today'sthreats but against increasingly more sophisticated and dangerous future threats.
Thank you.
ENDS
THIS ISSUE Lead NZ News NZ Politics World News FeaturesInternational News Intelligence: Bush Authorised Classified Leaks, Says Libby - Attorneys and current and former White House officials close to the investigation into the leak of covert CIA operative Valerie Plame Wilson said Thursday that President Bush gave Vice President Dick Cheney the authorization in mid-June 2003 to disclose a portion of the highly sensitive National Intelligence Estimate to Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward and former New York Times reporter Judith Miller. See... Jason Leopold: Bush at Center of Intelligence Leak ALSO:Scoop Link - The Smoking Gun: Extracts from Fitzgerald court filing
International Corporations: McDonald's linked to Amazon destruction - Greenpeace today exposed the role played by McDonald's in the destruction of the Amazon rainforest. As part of a new campaign to tackle the latest threat to the Amazon, Greenpeace has completed a year-long undercover investigation into the global trade in Amazon soya. The findings are today published in a new report, Eating up the Amazon (2). Using satellite images, aerial surveillance, previously unreleased government documents and on-the-ground monitoring, Greenpeace traced soya from criminal rainforest destruction to McDonald's restaurants and to supermarkets across Europe. See... McDonald's linked to Amazon destruction ALSO:Coca-Cola Misleading Public on Water Issues
Scoop Audio: Life for Miners In Bolivia... Independent journalist and photographer Dawn Paley is interviewed by Lorraine Chisholm. Paley has documented the working lives of mining families in Bolivia. Producer: Producer: Redeye Collective
Scoop Audio: Latest UN New Brief... Annan Warns Africa Needs A Million More Health Workers to Meet MDGs -International Migration Landscape Changed Over Last Decade: UNFPA - General Assembly President Describes Darfur Violence as "Ethnic Cleansing" - Egeland Urges World to put Pressure on Sudan - Efforts to Combat Bird Flu on Poultry Farms Showing Success: FAO - WFP to Provide Food Aid in Support of Peace Process in Southern Philippines.
Australia: Howard Tries Another Tampa Dogwhistle Round over West Papua - "The fact that the Australian Prime Minister John Howard stated yesterday that he doesn't want more West Papuans, and that he had the audacity to suggest that 'the majority of Australians' have that view shows he once again tries to introduce dirty population seduction and dog-whistle politics into the mix, and the Prime Minister should be condemned because of it," says WA Rights group Project SafeCom this morning. See... Howard Tries Another Tampa Dogwhistle Round over W. Papua ALSO:US Should Not Cozy With Kopassus, Indonesian MilitaryAust.: Media reports re-alleged arrival of Papuans
MORE INTERNATIONAL HEADLINES:UN looks for US backing for Human Rights CouncilUN Asia-Pacific Meeting: Jobs, global economy, cooperationNepal: Annan concerned over confrontation brewingDutch probe: Milosevic died of natural causesEuropean GMO Conference: A Missed Opportunity
FULL COVERAGE: PACIFIC ISLANDS FORUM REPORTAGE FULL COVERAGE: Ahmed Zaoui & Refugee Issues FULL COVERAGE: Reports on the Israel Palestine Crisis FULL COVERAGE: SIS Maori Party Bugging Controversy SCOOP SPECIAL REPORT: - American Coup IIQuick Retirement CalculatorTarget 110 000 ConsumersNZ REAL ESTATE OnlineBook Cheap FLIGHTS OnlineCalculate YOUR NETWORTHTRAVEL: Packages & Deals!MORTGAGE Calculators #this_text { text-align: left; vertical-align: middle;}#this_text a { font-family: "Verdana", sans-serif; font-size: 90%; color: #943517; text-decoration: underline;}#this_text a:hover { font-family: "Verdana", sans-serif; font-size: 90%; color: blue; text-decoration: underline;}Have You Checked Out the Scoop.co.nz Archives? Over 110 News Categories Here! THE WIRES Scoops Parliament Politics World Business Sci-Tech Culture Education Regional Health SEARCH _m1svt='');