Space

[Page: E504]

• Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 4. This bill declares it to be the policy of the United States to deploy a national missile defense.

• This bill continues this body's tradition and mission to provide for the safety and security of our democracy and its citizens. If we can develop a system that can prove itself, in rigorous testing, capable of protecting this country from a limited missile attack, then I think we should support this project. I support this bill because of the importance of America's national security.

• In recent years, ballistic missile and weapons of mass destruction technologies have proliferated at an alarming rate. The threat presented by these technologies, particularly from rogue states such as North Korea, Iraq, Libya and Iran, is growing more serious by the day. During the 105th Congress a bipartisan commission of national security experts was established to examine the threat to U.S. security. The commission's conclusions released in July 1998, indicate the threat posed to the United States by nations seeking to acquire ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction `is broader, more mature and evolving more rapidly than has been reported in estimates and reports by the intelligence community.' In its conclusion the commission highlighted that the United States might have little or no warning before a ballistic missile threat is known.

• While the growing threat is sobering, we should be realistic in our pursuit of a national missile defense. At present Mr. Speaker, we do not have a system ready for deployment. In five tests of the anti-missile interceptor known as THAAD, anti-missile interceptors have failed to hit a single target. We are a long way from being able to defend against a deliberate attack by a well-armed adversary let alone an accidental launch.

• I support this bill not because of the near term reality of a missile defense system but because of the growing threat to our national security. I further support this bill because of its limited scope. The bill does not say what will be deployed, when it will be deployed, or where it will be deployed. It would be imprudent for Congress to rush the technological development of a system, which remains unproven. If we deploy a system just for the sake of deploying a system we would be doing a grave disservice to the American people.

• In addition to deploying a system, which is cost effective and reliable, we also must consider the effect of a national missile defense on current treaties. We cannot push a national missile defense system so as to undermine the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START II) or the potential to further reduce weapons of mass destruction in future treaties.

• In adopting today's bipartisan bill, this body is signaling its commitment to the future defense of our Republic. Missile defense is but one prong of a successful strategy against weapons of mass destruction that has been followed by the Clinton Administration and this Congress. The first prong of this strategy is the prevention of threats through arms control and nonproliferation treaties. Included in the first prong is disarmament assistance to the former Soviet Union and multilateral export controls. The second prong of our defense has been deterrence by maintaining the strength of the U.S. armed forces.

• I would have preferred to have the opportunity to vote for the Allen amendment. This amendment would have ensured that the deployment of a national missile defense was based on technology, threat and affordability.

• While I support this resolution, I will be monitoring the progress of the development of the national missile defense system to ensure that it does not become a reckless waste of the American taxpayer's money. I would prefer to see a cost-effective system, which is ground based. Mr. Speaker, all Americans are concerned about the security of our nation and the protection of its citizens.

• As we proceed with the development of the national missile defense we should not lose sight of the successes which the first two prongs of our strategy have had in the defense against weapons of mass destruction. We would also be unwise not to heed the warnings of our intelligence community; this is why I will support the development of a national missile defense.

[Page: E505]

END