Weapons Expert Blasts Bush's Missile 'Defense'

by Bob Hicks, contributor

Donald Whitmore is a retired Boeing engineer wherehe worked on the development of weapons systems for over 32 years. Heis also past president of the East Valley Republican Club.

However, he is now an arms control activist and a grandfather of tenwho cares deeply about the future of his grandchildren. He is theauthor of the two-volume Rationale for Nuclear Disarmament, and is acurrent member of the Union of Concerned Scientists, the Arms ControlAssociation and the Northwest Disarmament Coalition. He is alsofounder and president of the Third Millennium Foundation.

Whitmore fits no simple profile, but is well qualified to offer acritique of President Bush’s new defense initiative that threatens topropel the world into a second arms race.

In two forums, Whitmore demonstrated that the National Missile Defenseinitiative is foolhardy.

Whitmore says the proposed program can intercept only a few potentialweapons of mass destruction (WOMD), the least probable of threats tothe US. NMD does not touch covert weapons (i.e., suitcase bombs),cruise missiles, or ballistic attacks via sea launches. The only WOMDthat the system could prevent is land-based ballistic attacks. Itseems clear that an enemy bent on assailing the US would simply seekto develop a cruise missile or detonate a covert nuclear weapon.

But the efficacy of NMD’s defense against land-based ballisticlaunches is also questionable. Whitmore demonstrated that in the caseof a 20-missile attack the plausible chance of at least one warheadpenetrating the system varies from 18 percent to 88 percent. This isnot exactly seamless armor. Why is there such a wide uncertaintyregarding the failure rate? Estimates cannot be firmly ascertained asa mere three system tests (all failures) have been performed to dateand only 19 are scheduled before NMD deployment.

The $100 million-per-trial-run prohibits sufficient testing. Whitmorecalculates that 200 predeployment tests would be needed to develop aneffective system. The Bush plan for a blind, rushed deployment of NMDwould not create the magical protective shield presented to thepublic, but instead, a makeshift sieve with holes whose size could notbe measured until they were breached.

Whitmore adds that the ineffectiveness of NMD is not his greatestconcern. The main problem, he said, is that this system would breakthe Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972. It would push China andRussia toward an alliance against the US. It would spur development ofmultiple warhead missiles. It would increase the national debt andsteal jobs from the civilian sector (military projects employ onlyhalf as many people as civilian work).

Whitmore adds that NMD also siphons off efforts to counter WOMD. Proposed budgets to intercept terrorist threats and to secure nuclearmaterials in Russia are apparently set to be slashed in order to fundNMD.

Whitmore stated, “I am for a strong defense; people don’t realizethat. But this shield gives the illusion of protection at the cost ofgaining real protection.”

Bob Hicks is Secretary of the Green Party of Skagit County in Mt.Vernon; (360) 466-0549.