By Emelie Rutherford
The missile-defense debate is heating up in Congress, with Republicans preparing to battle proposed Missile Defense Agency (MDA) cuts and a committee chairman advancing plans to collaborate with Russia on a European missile shield.
Sen. Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), the No. 2 Republican in his chamber, said yesterday the billions of dollars in missile-defense cuts Defense Secretary Robert Gates proposed “are inexplicable as a mater of policy and dangerous.” Kyl said at a Capitol Hill breakfast that Gates’ proposal to increase funding for theater missile defense is not necessarily bad, but should not come at the expense of national-missile-defense efforts.
“A lack of planned improvements to the national (missile) defense program is particularly worrying and might even be reversed,” he said.
Still, Kyl–echoing statements of other lawmakers vexed by Gates’ proposed program changes–said he “must see the final details of the defense budget before I can tell you how I believe we should right the ship.”
“I can tell you that it’s not going to be easy, obviously,” he said. “We face substantial cuts to the entire defense budget, and there’s no easy way to reallocate spending without doing damage to the missile-defense part of the president’s budget.”
Other Republican lawmakers and aides said this week–Congress’ first week back in session since Gates’ April 6 budget announcement–that they are still crafting plans for trying to reverse missile-defense cuts in the budget.
Kyl expressed concern that Gates’ proposed MDA changes would leave the United States inadequately protected from threats from Iran and North Korea. He said shifting funding away from national missile defense and the Multiple Kill Vehicle and Airborne Laser programs could hamper the longer-term goal of achieving the capability to shoot down a missile in the boost phase. And Kyl also questioned why such funding should be reduced at all when the government in spending more than $1 trillion to stimulate the economy.
Gates said he wants to cut the MDA by $1.4 billion. Kyl said because Gates also wants to increase funding by $900 million for theater missile defenses—the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense system, Standard Missile 3 program, and conversion of Aegis ships to provide ballistic-missile-defense capabilities–the MDA will have to shfit funding and grapple with $2.3 billion in reductions.
President Obama is expected to send his official proposal for the fiscal year 2010 base defense budget to Congress early next month. The White House and Congress have agreed to a $533.7 billion topline, a 2 percent real-growth increase over FY ’09 base defense funding.
Kyl said the Obama administration has made an “180-degree turn” from the Bush administration’s policies on missile defense and arms control. He said “Congress bears a great responsibility as we evaluate these policies,” and called on missile-defense experts at the breakfast sponsored by the National Defense University Foundation and National Defense Industrial Association to ensure the debate is informed.
John Isaacs, the executive director of the Council for a Livable World and the Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, predicted Republicans will fight “tooth and nail” to reverse Gates’ proposed MDA cuts.
“I expect fights,” Isaacs said. “In the Clinton years there were tooth and nail fights on missile defense. There started to be fights in the Bush administration by Democrats until (the) Sept. 11” terrorist attacks in 2001.
Isaacs noted how Kyl and senators including Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) tried unsuccessfully to amend the FY ’10 budget resolution to say missile-defense funds won’t be reduced.
Isaacs argued MDA funding should be cut “much more deeply” than Gates proposed, saying he agrees with Gates’ emphasis on theater missile defense but thinks national missile defense has gone “way too far.”
Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) Chairman Carl Levin (D-Mich.), who in the past has spoken favorably about trimming missile-defense funding, said yesterday he won’t comment on Gates’ proposed cuts until he sees Obama’s official budget proposal.
“I want to see the details, what their priorities are and why before I say anything,” Levin said at the Capitol.
The senator traveled to Russia, Poland, and the Czech Republic this month to talk about possible Russian involvement with the proposed missile shield–dubbed the “third site”– in the other two nations.
Levin said he and SASC members Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Susan Collins (R-Maine) spent the trip “mainly talking about the third site and how we might be able to see if anything’s possible with Russia, whether there might be a unifying approach to missile defense.”
The three senators will likely talk soon about the trip, Levin said.