28 June 2001

Rumsfeld Disavows ABM Treaty As Cornerstone of Strategic Stability

By Jacquelyn S. Porth
Washington File Security Affairs Writer

Washington -- Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told members of the House Armed Services Committee June 28 that the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty "is not, and to my knowledge, never was the centerpiece or cornerstone of strategic stability."

The ABM was an agreement between the then-Soviet Union and the United States, he said, and given the overwhelming strategic capabilities of these two nations "it had a value and it created a more stable situation between those two countries for a period, and it still does today."

But now the problem is that the Soviet Union no longer exists, the secretary said, and Russia "is not our enemy and we do not go to bed worrying about the problem of a strategic nuclear exchange with Russia." With the U.S.-Russian Cold War long over, "We need to get over it, it seems to me," he said.

Rumsfeld's response came after Representative Thomas Allen (Democrat, Maine) questioned what he perceives as a rush by the Bush administration to abrogate the ABM Treaty -- an arms control regime that he said has helped keep the peace for decades. Allen also criticized "the rush to deploy a national missile defense that is untested, hugely expensive, and may never work."

Rumsfeld said the argument that missile defenses are untested is without merit. "The reality is that that is exactly what we're doing. No one is deploying something that has not been tested."

In a later exchange with Representative John Spratt (Democrat, South Carolina) Rumsfeld said he didn't think spending 2% or 2.5% of the defense budget on missile defense was excessive. But Spratt insisted that the $3billion that is being added to the fiscal year 2002 defense budget for missile defense would go a long way toward recapitalization the Navy's dwindling shipbuilding budget.

"It does not sound to me that, if you recognize the power of weapons of mass destruction and the pervasiveness of proliferation, that investing something like two percent of the defense budget in defense against those kinds of threats is excessive," Rumsfeld answered.

In response to Allen's criticism, the secretary said, "the reality is that we're spending something like $11 billion-plus on terrorism issues for the United States government, and we're spending a much smaller amount on missile defense. So it's difficult to say what's too much or what's too little." The United States has interests in defending more than the territory of the continental U.S., he reminded the congressman. "We have deployed forces overseas, we have allies in NATO, we have allies in Asia; and the ability to threaten them affects us quite directly."

Rumsfeld dismissed allegations that the Bush administration is engaged in scare tactics regarding the threat from weapons of mass destruction. Countries like Iran "have very active germ warfare programs," he said, and are working with the Russians to develop nuclear capabilities. North Korea is close to having a ballistic missile with an intercontinental range. "And we know they have nuclear materials capable of developing some handful of nuclear weapons," he added.

The secretary said it would be an enormous mistake not to pay attention to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the ability to deliver them. A ballistic missile does not have to have an intercontinental (ICBM) range to be a threat, Rumsfeld pointed out, because it "can be put into a boat, a ship or a transport erector launcher" and fired if necessary through an opened canopy.

Without identifying the country, Rumsfeld said this has been done already by one of the countries that have this capability today. He reminded committee members that weapons of mass destruction do not have to have an ICBM range to be deadly.

Rumsfeld was also asked by Representative Ellen Tauscher (Democrat, California) whether the Pentagon's decision to cut 50 multi-warhead MX Peacekeeper missiles was budget or strategy driven. The secretary said he had encountered the reality that there was no money available to continue the program and none to terminate it.

The Air Force review of the MX program found that the missiles were not needed, he said, "And the work I've done with respect to the total nuclear offensive force persuaded me it was not needed. And since we had no money to do anything with it, it seemed appropriate" to end the program.

Rumsfeld said he is going to the U.S. Strategic Command in Omaha in a few days to understand more about implications of the congressionally-mandated Nuclear Posture Review that is under way. The United States has 7,500 offensive nuclear weapons, he said. "We don't need that many. The Peacekeeper will not make even the beginning of a dent in that total figure," he added. No decision has been made yet as to the disposition of the MX warheads, according to the secretary.

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Henry "Hugh" Shelton appeared with the secretary to provide his annual posture review statement for the last time before he retires. Like Rumsfeld, he told committee members that a sustained period of increased financial investment is needed "to develop a modern infrastructure capable of supporting our 21st Century force and the next generation of weapon systems."

Shelton was asked about the current situation in Macedonia. U.S. troops first went in there as part of a U.N. border mission around 1995, he said. But when the U.N. mandate expired in 1999, the U.S. presence shrunk to a single camp in support of operations in Kosovo.

A battalion of infantry are there now as part of a NATO operation. "We have supported efforts to reach an agreement between the Macedonian government and the NLA or the Albanian element," Shelton said. Beyond force protection for Camp Able Sentry, Shelton said the rest of the Macedonian issue "is being worked in the policy arena right now, in terms of the way ahead."

Both Shelton and Rumsfeld appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee later in the day.

Shelton's statement as submitted for the committee's record is available on the Web at http://www.house.gov/hasc/openingstatementsandpressreleases/107thcongress/01-06-28shelton.html and Rumsfeld's prepared statement is available at http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/2001/s20010628-secdef.html