Missile Shield Is Sought by 2004

Pentagon advisors are trying to devise a preliminary missile defense system that could be assembled at maximum speed for deployment before the end of President Bush’s term, according to sources familiar with the research.

As Bush prepares for a speech today that will formally inaugurate his campaign to sell an antimissile system, Pentagon advisors and independent experts said the team advising Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld believes it is vital to field a system by 2004 if possible, even if the system has limited effectiveness in destroying incoming warheads.

Erecting such a system could help dissuade an adversary from launching an intercontinental missile, supporters say. Fielding a system is also desirable because, in their view, it would help finally commit the nation to a technology that has been hotly debated since it was first proposed by President Reagan nearly two decades ago.

Analysts noted that deployment by the presidential election year of 2004 also has political advantages for Bush, who sought to win favor with conservatives by promising that he would build a system.

In the view of most missile defense experts, deploying a system within 3 1/2 years would be a major feat.

The Clinton administration was aiming until late last year to deploy the first phase of its limited, ground-based system by 2005. But a series of test failures and other complications convinced officials that the schedule was likely to slip until 2006 or 2007.

Rumsfeld is expected to make his recommendation to the White House within the next few weeks. The Bush administration also will take into consideration the recommendations of other top-level administration officials and U.S. allies before unveiling its final plan later this spring.

In his speech, to be delivered at National Defense University in Washington, Bush will announce that he is about to begin intensive consultations with allies on development of an antimissile shield, aides said. Though key U.S. allies have worried that such a move will undermine arms control treaties, Bush will declare that an antimissile capability is now necessary to protect against terrorist attack, an accidental launch, or nuclear “blackmail” by antagonistic powers.

The president will also try to reassure allies by saying he would make unilateral cuts in the U.S. nuclear arsenal at the same time that he builds an antimissile shield.

Construction of a missile defense system would, at some point, violate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which banned such a system as a way to prevent a further arms race. Administration officials have in recent days warned U.S. allies that Bush intends to rewrite or scrap the treaty.

The price of a missile defense system has also been a source of debate. Critics say it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars, but missile defense advocates estimate that the cost would only be tens of billions of dollars. The program proposed by the Clinton administration was expected to cost about $60 billion.

On Monday, as he prepared for the speech, Bush discussed the subject by telephone with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, French President Jacques Chirac, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and NATO Secretary-General George Robertson.

“Lots of questions remain unanswered. Germany is anxious to avoid a new arms race,” said Ulrike Kaiser, a German government spokeswoman, according to Bloomberg News.

The French also oppose the plan, according to a defense analyst quoted by Bloomberg.

“They dislike the ‘Star Wars’ element in it, the whole futuristic hype, and they have their doubts about its workability,” said Philippe Moreau Defarges, senior fellow at the French Institute of International Relations. “But more importantly they are concerned it will restart the arms race, boost proliferation and weaken links with allies.”

Administration officials declined to provide details of the program that the administration is contemplating, or the timetable they are considering. They said Bush does not intend to go into specifics about the system.

But a senior administration official, who briefed reporters on the condition of anonymity, said that the Bush team intends to field a system “as soon as possible.” This official acknowledged that while there are “a variety of promising technologies,” finding the right ones for the task will require trial and error or, in the official’s word, “triage.”

Missile defense critics contend that trying to quickly deploy a system of limited effectiveness would be a major mistake.

In their view, it could increase security risks to the United States by encouraging potential adversaries either to build up their arsenals or figure out ways to demobilize the American system by blinding its sensors, for example, or destroying essential components.

“I’m against this scarecrow option,” said Joe Cirincione of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “There’s very little chance that it would actually work, and it could be worse than nothing at all.”

The Clinton system aimed for 95% reliability, meaning that it could destroy all but 5% of incoming missiles before they reached the United States. Critics of missile defense contend that a system fast-tracked for deployment would not receive the necessary testing and development, and thus would have considerably lower reliability.

Deployment of such a system might lead Russia to believe it should not make planned reductions in its nuclear arsenal, critics say, and might cause China to increase a long-range missile arsenal that now numbers about 20. And, it could lead the North Koreans to speed up work on technologies such as sea-skimming cruise missiles that could destroy American antimissile warships or antimissile radar installations.

Several groups have been asked to make recommendations to Rumsfeld on the missile defense issue.

One committee examined military “transformation.” In an interim report in March, it urged the Pentagon to move quickly on missile defense, arguing that it should “accept program risk to facilitate early deployment.”

Although some missile defense advisors have indicated their desire to develop a plan that could be fielded by 2004, it is not clear that they will urge such a timetable in their final recommendations. Nor is it clear that Rumsfeld, who has solicited advice from a number of expert panels, would accept such advice.

Army officials have already advised the new Bush team that they can deploy a system of ground-based interceptor missiles by 2004, according to one defense expert close to the confidential process. But the Army said that even on an accelerated schedule it could field no more than a handful of interceptor missiles by that date, the expert said.