ambassador speeches
Missile Defense: Working with Allies to Defend Europe
Remarks by Ambassador William J. Cabaniss, September 06, 2006
Ladies and Gentlemen, it a pleasure and a privilege to be here today among so many distinguished leaders who have devoted much of their energies to the national security of the Czech Republic. I’d like to thank our hosts, Jagello 2000 and the EuroAtlantic Council, for giving us the opportunity to present our perspectives on a major element of security policy for the future.
How did we all get here? There was an invitation from the Czech Republic to the United States. During 2002, in talks with U.S. officials, Czech government representatives agreed on the seriousness of the future threat to Europe. The Czech Republic was one of among several countries which expressed interest in hosting a missile defense facility. In 2004 the Czech Cabinet entrusted the Ministry of Defense to continue an exchange of technical information to allow the consideration of a missile defense system in the Czech Republic. All of our work on the three candidate sites presented by the Czech Republic stemmed from that Cabinet decision.
Today we are working together as allies to examine the potential to defend Europe and North America in the future. As a steward of the relationship between the United States and the Czech Republic, it is my hope that we will be able to offer the Czech Republic a chance to host a missile defense facility. However if the U.S. offers a facility, it will be up to the Czech Republic to look at the facts and make a final decision. I am here today to support that effort.
I have already taken the opportunity to publicly lay out in the press the basic figures about the size and composition of the facility under consideration. A radar could be co-located with the interceptor missiles or constructed on another site. If they were co-located the facility would involve:
Naturally, if a smaller facility involving only missiles or radar were to be offered by the United States, the numbers would be smaller. Several accounts in the press claim that the U.S. has made a decision on what kind of facility to offer and where it would be. Let me be clear: A decision has not yet been made.
I’d also like to reiterate some of the basic facts about the system and the process of bringing it to Europe:
Now I’d like to return to the bigger picture - why are we considering this together? I believe that we have to keep the importance of the mission in mind when framing the debate. We have to look at why we see this as a priority, and what we are doing together to ensure a secure future.
The threats to tomorrow’s Europe will not come in the form of tanks and marching armies. We were lucky in the 20th century that those nations which possessed both ballistic missiles and nuclear bombs thought rationally and compassionately about humanity’s prospects in a nuclear war. In an era with many smaller, less stable, more fanatical regimes the future is less predictable. Today 26 nations currently have ballistic missiles. General Obering, the Director of the Missile Defense Agency, testified this April that in 2005 there were nearly eighty foreign ballistic missile launches around the world. Nearly sixty launches involved short-range ballistic missiles, approximately ten involved medium- and intermediate-range missiles, and about ten involved long-range ballistic missiles. The number of ballistic missile launches in the future is sure to increase.
Our current and near-term missile defense fielding activities are a direct response to Iran’s and North Korea’s relentless pursuit of longer-range ballistic missiles. We live in a time of uncertainty and must be ready to operate the ballistic missile defense system against new and unexpected threats. Otherwise our ability to act together in the future could well be limited by ballistic missile threats from the Middle East.
It is important that we continue our approach to building an integrated, multilayered defensive system. Research continues as part of an ongoing process. The system is getting better and will continue to do so.
There are many parts of the missile defense system. The global nature of the threat requires that we work closely with our allies and friends to develop, field, and operate missile defenses. The part that would be based in Europe is designed to engage ballistic missiles that are in the in the middle of their flight path, on their way to Europe or to the United States. Other elements of the system are being developed and deployed to counter the launch phase, and the final phase. With the cooperation of our allies and friends, we plan to evolve this defensive capability to make it more effective against all ranges of threats in all phases of flight and expand the system over time with additional interceptors, sensors, and layers.
Our mutual allies are already involved in ensuring freedom from the threats of the future.
Numerous missile defense components are deployed throughout the world. In Europe, the existing early warning radar in the United Kingdom has been upgraded to enable its integration and employment as a component of the Ballistic Missile Defense System. A forward-based X-band radar has been deployed to Japan, the Patriot system against short to medium range missiles is in numerous locations around the world and U.S. ships equipped with advanced missile defense radars and interceptor missiles are preparing for operation in the Pacific Ocean. Also, long-range interceptor missiles are located in Alaska and California in the U.S., and an upgraded missile tracking radar is located in the Aleutian Islands in Alaska. In addition, the U.S. and Denmark have signed an agreement to use an upgraded early warning radar in Greenland that will be integrated into the missile defense system in the next few years.
Technology development is also crucial and has its own economic impact: We have ongoing technical cooperation work on developing the necessary technologies with Japan, the United Kingdom, Israel and Australia. The Missile Defense Agency remains open to working with firms in allied countries with technology to contribute to the success of this mission.
We believe that our common values and transatlantic security cooperation would be significantly threatened by a ballistic missile threat to Europe. Countering the ballistic missile threat is key to ensuring that we will be able to work together in the future. The U.S. proposal to place a missile defense facility in Europe is evidence of our commitment to our friends and allies for decades to come. Defending the United States would be more difficult without the assistance of our partners in Europe. However it would still be possible. The crucial defect of such a system located only in the U.S. would be that it could not defend our closest allies and friends in Europe. Europe is situated much closer to the threat, and cannot wait for an interceptor to fly from the United States. Without interceptors and sensors in Europe we will all be open to the influence of those that would seek to destroy the integrity of NATO through the threat of ballistic missile attack.
That commitment to allies is why we discuss the smaller issues surrounding location of a missile defense facility in Central Europe. That commitment to allies is why we conducted joint U.S.-Czech site surveys. And that commitment to allies is why we work together today on the elements of ensuring mutual security from ballistic threats for decades to come.
I leave you with one thought that drives this process. Czech participation in Missile Defense would be an opportunity for a Czech leadership role in the defense and security of Europe. And I sincerely believe that would be good for us all.
Missile Defense Cooperation
