Don’t Touch the Missile Defense Money

The United States has no defense against a ballistic missile attack – not even a single missile. Most Americans do not know this, so it has been an uphill battle for more than a decade to organize the resources of the United States government to attempt to deal with the problem.

The United States has no defense against a ballistic missile attack – not even a single missile. Most Americans do not know this, so it has been an uphill battle for more than a decade to organize the resources of the United States government to attempt to deal with the problem. Happily, during the past six months it has appeared that even the Clinton Administration and some of its allies in Congress were beginning to get the message.

The May nuclear explosions in India and then Pakistan; the July release of the Rumsfeld Commission Report; the North Korean three-stage rocket shot over Japan; and recent Chinese statements about targeting Los Angeles appeared to concentrate the attention of some of America’s most ardent ostriches. (Particularly those living in California and Hawaii.) Secretary of Defense Cohen admitted in January that the ABM Treaty with Russia might be an impediment to the development of defenses the U.S. needs against potential enemies other than Russia. The Administration actually put $1 billion in additional money into Ballistic Missile Defense Organization (BMDO).

Those of us who believe the United States needs to defend itself and its friends and allies from ballistic missile attack, of course, welcome this new attitude and the additional funding. Israel, in particular, benefits from American concerns for ballistic missile defense – the Arrow program and the Tactical High Energy Laser – are funded in large measure by American money.

But what the Administration has given with one hand, it now proposes to take away with the other. Members of the House and Senate report that the Administration is planning to take $230 million of that $1 billion – and maybe more – to fund the Wye River Agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

Some well-meaning members of Congress wrote in a “Dear Colleague” letter supporting the Wye money, “The proliferation of missiles and weapons of mass destruction makes the task of stabilizing the region more urgent. The Wye aid package is a significant part of American policy in the Middle East – a policy designed to prevent future conflict.”

What a contradiction! Stabilization of the region would be far better accomplished through the development and deployment of ballistic missile defenses than by giving corrupt Palestinian officials ever more money to squander on themselves and their cronies. The money in the plan for Israelis to offset the cost of IDF redeployment in the West Bank – a redeployment Israel has postponed owing to serious Palestinian non-compliance with the terms of the Wye Accord!

Rerouting money from BMDO to Wye implementation allows the Administration to: (a) avoid congressional debate on the merits of funding the Wye Accord, and (b) claim to be in favor of missile defenses while slowing their development through reduced funding. Our response is: (a) Wye implementation needs and deserves full congressional debate and oversight, and (b) stealing from missile defense for other purposes should be unacceptable to the Congress.