Patriot Flap: On Target or Unguided Missile? : Objectivity needed in weighing weapon’s Gulf performance

How effective were the U.S. Patriot missiles used in last year’s Persian Gulf War to defend Saudi Arabia and Israel against Scud missile attacks from Iraq? The Army, though it has downgraded its initial claims for the Patriot’s performance, describes the weapon as “a terrific success story, tactically, psychologically and politically.” But analysts from the General Accounting Office and the Congressional Research Service, as well as outside defense experts, are by no means so sure.

KILLS OR MISSES? Questioning both the Army’s methodology in evaluating the Patriot’s combat performance and its conclusions, they contend that claims of success have been exaggerated. The seeming interceptions of Scuds that were so dramatically televised may in many cases simply have been Iraq’s poorly welded missiles breaking up in flight. The number of actual “kills” of the 88 Scuds that reached Saudi or Israeli air space, the critics say, may have been relatively small.

The dispute is serious. Claims made for the Patriot--Gulf War commander Gen. Norman H. Schwarzkopf early in the conflict said 33 out of 33 Scuds had been destroyed, President Bush later said 41 out 42 had been intercepted--helped prompt Congress last year to approve a big increase in spending on an anti-missile system to protect U.S. territory. More immediately, the Patriot continues to be an important part of the air defense arsenals of Saudi Arabia and Israel. American forces remaining in the Persian Gulf area, only a few minutes’ flight time from possible Iraqi missile launching sites, similarly depend on the Patriot for protection.

AIRBORNE INTERCEPTION: The argument over the Patriot’s effectiveness in no small part involves information that is still classified. It includes analyses of digital data recordings, videotapes, missile debris and investigators’ reports. In its reassessment, the Army says “we are confident that over 40% of the engagements in Israel and over 70% . . . in Saudi Arabia were successful.” Successful, though, is a word of ambiguous meaning. The Army says it’s confident that of all the Scuds fired, about 40%--that would be about 35--were hit by Patriots. About two dozen of these are claimed as “warhead kills,” although non-Pentagon experts have told Congress that in fact only one warhead may have been hit. The warhead kill figure is the key, because a warhead that is not exploded in the air can produce devastation on the ground even if the missile carrying it is blown up or deflected from its intended target.

If the Patriot needs improvement, the first requisite is a clear and objective understanding of what its shortcomings could be, and what it would take to fix them. Rep. John Conyers Jr. (D-Mich.), who chaired last week’s Government Operations Committee hearings on the Patriot, has called on Defense Secretary Dick Cheney to order an independent evaluation of the Army’s analysis, by which he means an evaluation “by a group that does not have an interest in the outcome.” If the Pentagon is confident of its data, and the Army secure in its evaluation, there is no reason to reject that idea. Does the missile work as advertised? If so, fine. If not, do what’s needed to upgrade it.