A big topic I keep hearing on the radio and on television is people saying that Defense Secretary Robert Gates has foolishly cut missile defense systems that will further expose the US to North Korean attack.  Are these cuts really foolish as proclaimed?  Well let’s take a look at what he cut.  Here is an excerpt from Secretary Gates’ speech:

Fourth, in the area of missile defense:
• We will restructure the program to focus on the rogue state and theater missile threat.
• We will not increase the number of current ground-based interceptors in Alaska as had been planned. But we will continue to robustly fund continued research and development to improve the capability we already have to defend against long-range rogue missile threats – a threat North Korea’s missile launch this past weekend reminds us is real.
• We will cancel the second airborne laser (ABL) prototype aircraft. We will keep the existing aircraft and shift the program to an R&D effort. The ABL program has significant affordability and technology problems and the program’s proposed operational role is highly questionable.
• We will terminate the Multiple Kill Vehicle (MKV) program because of its significant technical challenges and the need to take a fresh look at the requirement.
• Overall, the Missile Defense Agency program will be reduced by $1.4 billion.  [DefenseLink]

So let’s go through these cuts.

1. Ground Based Interceptors

First of all Gates announced he is not increasing the number of ground based interceptors in Alaska.  Here is a news flash for everyone, the interceptors currently in Alaska did not go through the military’s normal acquisition process and have never been through rigorous operational testing:

But Dr. McQueary told the House Armed Services Strategic Forces Subcommittee, which oversees the missile defense program, that additional assessments are needed before he can confirm a high level of statistical confidence in the system.

“There’s simply not been enough testing done in order to be able to state it,” he said. The test and evaluation office that Dr. McQueary directs provides Defense Department officials with independent reviews of weapons and equipment.

The hearing comes amid reports suggesting that North Korea may be preparing an advanced version of the Taepodong-2 missile with a striking range extending to the U.S. West Coast and Alaska.

Despite the need for more evaluation, Dr. McQueary said, U.S. officials are prepared to respond to a potential threat from the communist regime.

“We’ve consistently said that we need more modeling and simulation,” he said. “(But) if the North Koreans launched an attack against us this afternoon, we wouldn’t say we need more test data before we decided whether we were going to launch against and try to intercept that. We’d see how the system works and we’d find out.”

The ground-based system is a network of interceptor missiles linked by satellites, radar and communications networks. It has destroyed targets successfully in eight of 13 tests since 1999, according to Defense Department statistics.  [Air Force Link]

So why buy more interceptors for a system that has worked 8 out of 13 times during very simple developmental tests?  All Gates is saying is that more research and development is going to be done to improve the ground based interceptors the US already has before any decision to buy more of them is made.  What is so bad about that?  Sound responsible to me.

2.  The Airborne Laser

All Secretary Gates said is that the Pentagon would not buy a second airborne laser (ABL) prototype aircraft.  Similar to the ground based interceptors in Alaska, why buy a second aircraft of a system that the first aircraft hasn’t proven it can work?  Gates didn’t kill the program he just said the program needs to go through further research and development and prove itself before more systems are bought.  Once again what is so bad about that?

3.  Multiple Kill Vehicle

This system would allow one missile to have multiple kill vehicles to knock out multiple incoming ballistic missiles.  The technology sounds very cool, but if the Pentagon is looking to make cuts this is an obvious one because the price of developing this system would be enormously expensive and the system is currently in its infancy with just modeling and simulations being done.  So now was the time to cut it before any more money was poured into it.

What the Pundits Won’t Tell You

Now take a look at the part of Secretary Gates’ speech that I have not heard one pundit emphasize:

To better protect our forces and those of our allies in theater from ballistic missile attack, we will add $700 million to field more of our most capable theater missile defense systems, specifically the terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) System and Standard Missile 3 (SM-3) programs.

We will also add $200 million to fund conversion of six additional Aegis ships to provide ballistic missile defense capabilities.

Before the North Korean missile launch even happened both SM-3 and THAAD systems were prepared to intercept the North Korean missile if ordered to do so.  Ground based interceptors and Airborne Lasers still in development and systems that only exist in computer simulations will not shoot down a North Korean missile, but the THAAD and SM-3 missiles can.  So since these two systems actually work Gates is pouring $700 million extra into these programs and another $200 million for six additional AEGIS ships that will be equipped with even more SM-3 missiles that will provide further protection against North Korean missile threats then continuing to pour money into the systems that were sent back into research and development or cut.

In my opinion Gates’ cuts and reinvestments in missile defense systems that currently work has actually made the US safer from the North Korean missile threat.  Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?