Congressional reaction to the new budget plan by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates ranged from polite but reserved, to strident condemnation, especially in his plans to cut some missile defense programs.
Some lawmakers were especially dismayed that Gates chose to propose the missile defense cuts just a day after North Korea violated international rules and resolutions to launch a long-distance missile that arced over Japan and landed in the Pacific Ocean.
Also, his proposal for the defense budget covering the fiscal year ending Sept. 30, 2010, came after Iran recently used a missile to loft a satellite into orbit, the same technology that’s used in intercontinental ballistic missiles.
Sen. John Kyl (R-Ariz.), said the North Korean missile launch was “a reckless display by one of the world’s most brutal and dictatorial regimes,” an act that proves the critical need for U.S. missile defense systems.
Kyl urged President Obama “to fully fund the Missile Defense Agency” in fiscal 2010, which would mean Obama would have to overrule the Gates plan to cut $1.4 billion from the roughly $10 billion current yearly level for missile defense.
Rep. Ike Skelton (D-Mo.), the House Armed Services Committee (HASC) chairman, praised Gates for working hard on the budget proposal. But Skelton then quickly added that it is the duty of Congress to decide which programs shall proceed, and which defense programs shall be cut.
“The buck stops with Congress, which has the critical Constitutional responsibility to decide whether to support these proposals,” Skelton noted. “In the weeks ahead, my colleagues and I will carefully consider these proposals and look forward to working with Secretary Gates and Admiral Mullen as we prepare the Fiscal Year 2010 defense authorization act.”
That referred to Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
The ranking Republican on the HASC, Rep. John M. McHugh of New York, sounded a similar theme. “It remains the Congress’ responsibility to provide for the common defense,” McHugh said.
“Secretary Gates’ statement includes significant programmatic decisions that seem to be based on assumptions about the current security environment. The Congress needs to ensure it understands and agrees with these assumptions about the threats we face before we can endorse decisions on the capabilities our military does and does not require,” McHugh stated.
Further, McHugh said that while Gates is well to propose shifting costs of ongoing wars in Afghanistan and Iraq from supplemental measures into the regular defense budget, doing that without increasing the total size of the budget would be “tantamount to an $8 billion cut in defense spending.”
And McHugh went further, roundly criticizing some parts of the Gates plan, where the defense chief would cut missile defense programs, saying Gates dangerously wishes to focus attempts to kill enemy missiles in their final moments of trajectory before hitting American targets, while cutting programs that would hit enemy missiles shortly after they launch.
“Cutting missile defense spending and focusing missile defense programs to a ballistic missile’s terminal phase places unnecessary risk to the homeland,” McHugh said. “Just a day after North Korea launched a long range ballistic missile the secretary missed an opportunity to re-commit to investment in missile defense capabilities.”
Many other Republican lawmakers, members of the House Missile Defense Caucus, were much stronger in their comments, reacting with amazement to the Gates budget plan for cutting missile defense.
Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), a leader and founder of the group, said the North Korean missile launch shows this is no time to shortchange missile defense programs. He is a member of the HASC strategic forces subcommittee that oversees missile defense programs.
“North Korea’s launch of a long-range ballistic missile should be a clarion wake-up call to the whole world that this is not the time to diminish our missile defense budget as proposed by” Gates, Franks said.
“Rather, it is a moment to strengthen our resolve and our military capability to defend ourselves and our allies, and to work to prevent North Korea’s dangerous missile and nuclear proliferation from arming our enemies across the world.”
North Korea is far from being the only rising missile threat around the globe, Franks said.
“Reports that Iranian missile experts were present for the launch compounds the threat. As dangerous as North Korea’s missile capability is becoming, it should be noted that Iran’s missile technology is far [more] advanced than that of North Korea; and if Iran should also gain the nuclear capability now possessed by North Korea, the entire paradigm of world peace would be jeopardized.”
Iran recently launched that satellite into orbit, is producing nuclear materials that Western leaders fear will be used to build nuclear weapons, and has fired a missile from a submerged submarine.
“The Obama administration must take action to enforce concrete economic sanctions to further isolate North Korea, and should be neither seduced by pressure from Russia, nor intimidated by China’s economic influence. This is a time for us to be strong and committed for the sake of this and future generations,” Franks said.
Another lawmaker, Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.), expressed hope that Obama won’t endorse the Gates plan to slash missile defense programs.
In light of the North Korean missile test, “Missile defense must be made a priority and accordingly the administration needs to take the necessary steps to ensure America’s national defense initiatives aligns with its priorities,” Campbell argued. “America has the technology to make missile defense operationally viable and we need to continue to allocate resources to bring a robust, layered, and reliable defense network to bear against this emerging threat.”
Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Colo.), a HASC member, expressed a similar view about the North Korean launch, hoping that “the Obama administration learns from it and does not cut back on this very important program” to erect a missile defense protection.
“We must not allow rogue nations to threaten us with ballistic missiles when the technology exists to protect us and our allies from them,” said Rep. Todd Akin R-Mo.
Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) said North Korea is an outlaw regime, and the missile launch “clearly and defiantly violated the rules, and {Pyongyang] should be held accountable for this.”
“It is crucial that we not cut military spending, but continue to advance our technologies and keep our country safe,” he said.
While Obama said after the launch that North Korea must not be permitted to break rules without suffering a penalty, his administration seems to want to negotiate some more with the North.
“The rocket launch by North Korea shows that diplomacy and U.N. resolutions may not, by themselves, be enough to protect ourselves from a threat,” said Rep. Robert Aderholt (R- Ala.)
He hopes Obama will reverse missile defense cuts in the Gates plan. “It is my sincere hope that the President’s budget will include continued support for the Ground-based midcourse defense system as well as a robust testing and development schedule for other missile defense systems,” Aderholt said.
Rep. Kay Granger (R-Texas) said the North Korean missile technology and capability threatens neighboring states.
North Korea ignored laws forbidding the launch, and an outcry from leaders of many nations condemning the launch, so Pyongyang isn’t concerned about legalities, she said. Rather, Granger added, the United States must recognize reality, that the North won’t stop its headlong rush to develop missile and nuclear technologies. The United States must respond by completing a robust missile defense system, she said.