President Obama’s decision to scrap a long-planned European-based missile defense shield was not only met with concern among our European allies, but more importantly, has sounded alarms here at home where the president’s action would leave the nation vulnerable to Iranian long-range missile attack.
President Obama’s decision to scrap a long-planned European-based missile defense shield was not only met with concern among our European allies, but more importantly, has sounded alarms here at home where the president’s action would leave the nation vulnerable to Iranian long-range missile attack.
Three years ago in response to growing threats from Iran, the Bush administration developed plans to install a missile defense system in Eastern Europe to protect Europe and the United States from potential long range missile attack. Under the program, 10 interceptor missiles would be located in Poland and a radar station would be built in the Czech Republic with the goal of being fully operational by 2013.
The European-based missile defense system would add an additional layer of defense to the continental United States which already has a small network of interceptors on the West Coast. The European-based missile defense shield was endorsed by our NATO allies who called it a “substantial contribution” to their collective security. Now, the Obama administration has taken the unusual and highly questionable position of cancelling the planned European-based missile defense system in favor of a scaled back program that will not be ready until 2020.
The threat represented by Iran is real and growing. Last February, Iran launched a satellite, demonstrating substantial progress toward achieving a reliable long-range missile program. A month later, the head of the U.S. European Command testified before the House Armed Services Committee that Iran would be able to deploy an Intercontinental Ballistic Missile (ICBM) capable of reaching all of Europe and parts of the U.S. by the year 2015.
The president stated his decision was based upon reduced threats from Iran and greater cost efficiency of his alternative defense system. However, a July 2008 classified report produced by the Institute for Defense Analysis concluded that the European-based missile defense system that the administration now wants to cancel would in fact be the most cost effective. I have called on the administration to declassify this report so that all the facts can be known.
Moscow has made no secret of its opposition to a European-based missile defense system and has repeatedly called for its elimination. Furthermore, Russian leaders continually show they have no intention of pressuring Iran to drop its nuclear and missile programs. For its part, Iran also shows no willingness to be deterred by Russia. Yet, the administration, in courting Moscow’s assistance in halting Iran’s nuclear and missile ambitions, has effectively chosen to surrender America’s bargaining position with its shelving of the proposed missile defense system.
While the Obama administration’s decision to reverse course on European missile defense is being met with smiles in Moscow, Americans have real reason to be concerned. By the administration’s own admission, its alternative missile defense system will not be fully capable until 2020. With intelligence indicating Iran will have ICBM capability by 2015, this means the United States could be vulnerable to Iranian missile attack five full years before the administration gets its new missile defense system ready.
Not only is Iran near its goal of launching ICBMs, reportedly it already has the ability to construct a nuclear bomb. Last Thursday, a group of experts at the International Atomic Energy Agency stated in a report obtained by the Associated Press that Iran is already capable of building a nuclear bomb and “is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead.”
Remarkably, in the face of Iran’s blatant actions to develop a nuclear weapons program, the administration continues to pursue a course of unilateral disarmament. Earlier this year, the president cut funding for missile interceptors to be based in Alaska as part of the ongoing construction of a homeland missile defense system, reducing the number of interceptors by one-third. I opposed that move and offered an amendment in the House to restore the funding. Unfortunately, the president’s cuts were sustained.
The administration’s record on missile defense, at a time when both North Korea and Iran are seeking nuclear weapons capable of reaching the U.S., is troubling. This year, the administration has cut missile defense by $1.2 billion, reducing by a third our intended West Coast shield which would protect us from North Korea’s advancements, and has stopped a European-based system intended to protect the U.S. from Iranian missile threats. In the face of known threats, this administration needs to rededicate itself to the defense of the U.S. mainland.