View From the Hill

In Support of Ballistic Missile Defense

by Senator Richard Shelby (R-AL)

This year marks the 25th anniversary of President Ronald Reagan’s famous speech in support of what would be known as the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI). As outlined by President Reagan in 1983, the United States’ goal was to employ both ground and space-based assets to protect our nation from nuclear ballistic missile threats around the world. While this would not be our country’s first defensive system against nuclear ballistic missiles, it was a clear and decisive tack away from the former path of mutual assured destruction.

Since that historic speech, the United States’ missile defense capabilities have exponentially grown, as have the threats we now face. The organization overseeing our ballistic missile defense efforts, now known as the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), must address a litany of issues surrounding not only our current capabilities, but future threats that we may face in order to be prepared. The principal danger today is no longer the threat of a nuclear first strike by the Soviet Union as it was during the Cold War, but the threat stemming from a limited number of long-range missiles armed with weapons of mass destruction in the hands of rogue states.

To effectively address this threat, MDA has developed and continues to research advanced defensive systems to meet and defeat any potential ballistic missile attacks in the future. Without question, ensuring our continued efforts toward research, development and deployment of various ballistic missile systems is a critical aspect of ensuring the best possible national defense. Regardless of the missile defense system chosen, whether it is Kinetic Energy Interceptor, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or Ground-based Midcourse Defense, we need to ensure a solid defense in boost, midcourse and terminal phases. Countering the threat from long-range and theater missiles will require continuing technical advances to make certain that the U.S. remains secure.

Working towards deploying a robust missile defense system, we must have the capability to counter worldwide threats posed to the United States and her allies. While in 1972, only nine countries had a ballistic missile capability, today there are 27 countries with these abilities. In 2007, there were nearly 120 foreign ballistic missile launches around the world. In July, Iran conducted what appeared to be several missile tests, including a launch of their Shahab-3 missile. While our intelligence assessments have since cast doubt over some of Iran’s claims, the fact that test missile launches did occur once again illustrates the need for additional protection. By developing a third site missile defense location that places radars and interceptors in Eastern Europe, the United States could effectively deter or prevent attacks launched from the Middle East and strengthen transatlantic security. Without sufficient support for the Third Site, we risk emboldening rogue nations that view the proliferation of weapons technology as their hedge against U.S. security interests throughout the world.

As we look to the future of national missile defense, it is my hope that the nation will continue to recognize the importance of our efforts. While it will always be difficult to know precisely who will threaten us or where and when the threat will become real, we know that the technology for ballistic missiles will continue to advance and they will become easier to acquire in the years ahead. This is precisely why we need to support the continuing development of the means to defend against these weapons. As our nation continues to face a multitude of challenges to our national security, we must continue to keep our eye on the ballistic missile defense effort and not lose sight of what we have accomplished and what we can still accomplish. I feel that President Reagan would want no less. ♦