Pentagon weapons buyer backs space missile plan

By Jim Wolf

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The Pentagon’s top weapons buyer has
endorsed a controversial plan that could lead to a
multibillion-dollar U.S. missile defense component in space and
strain ties with China, Russia and other countries.

At issue is what the Pentagon’s Missile Defense Agency
calls a space-based “test bed.” It would initially involve as
few as one or two interceptor missiles designed to shoot down
ballistic missiles possibly tipped with nuclear, chemical or
germ warheads.

“I’m supportive of creating a test bed,” Kenneth Krieg,
undersecretary of defense for acquisition, told Reuters in an
interview on Tuesday. “And then we’ll see what we do with it
afterwards.”

The Missile Defense Agency plans to seek $45 million in
seed money to start building the experimentation center in the
fiscal year that starts October 1, 2007.

The project would gauge the value of putting interceptor
missiles in space to strengthen the U.S. anti-ballistic missile
shield being developed on the ground, at sea and aboard a
modified Boeing Co. jumbo jet equipped with an airborne laser.

Other companies with big missile-defense contracts include
Lockheed Martin Corp., Northrop Grumman Corp., and Raytheon
Co..

The Bush administration has been spending roughly $10
billion a year on all aspects of ballistic missile defense.

The space-based pilot project would involve just one or two
“small scale” interceptors with no offensive capability, Lt.
Gen. Henry Obering, head of the Missile Defense Agency, said in
a September interview with Arms Control Today magazine.

CHINA, RUSSIA CONCERNS

Krieg said the project would create new missile-defense
options, “and I think increasing the number of options we have
to choose from is generally a good idea.”

Critics say building such a facility may strain ties with
countries such Russia and China that oppose the idea of weapons
in space.

“The concern is that you’re going to wind up spending a lot
of money and all that’s going to happen is you’re going to have
more nuclear weapons aimed at American cities,” said John Pike
of GlobalSecurity.org, an expert on space and weapons issues.

China and Russia probably would respond by deploying more
long-range missiles “to make sure that our defense did not work
against them,” he said.

Calling it a “test bed” may not allay concerns since this
is how a Fort Greely, Alaska, interceptor site was described
before it in effect became operational, said Wade Boese,
research director of the private Arms Control Association.

Obering made a similar point in the September 29 interview
with Arms Control Today.

“I would anticipate that we would not have an operational
space-based interceptor layer unless we needed it,” he said.
“But these defenses take time, so being able to go from a test
bed into an operational status in a very short amount of time
is something that is an advantage, not a disadvantage.”