December 27, 2004 :: News
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld recently held a press conference in which he discussed how the missile defense system would likely be deployed.
Rumsfeld said that we would soon we have “a very modest capability,” and adding that “I don’t know that that’s not true today. I’m not announcing it, but if you, for example, said that there was some reason to—that there was some threat that was evolving and it would be desirable to go out of a test mode and see the extent to which you could be in an operational mode, my impression is it wouldn’t take long to get there.”
Of additional interest is Rumsfeld’s final comment that at the present time, the administration does not see an urgent threat, and so are not “pressured” to begin deployment soon.
Rumsfeld also noted that there might not be a formal announcement, or that it might be very low-key: “And I can’t answer your question as to when or if we would have an announcement, but I would guess that the announcement would be very much like what I just said; that we are proceeding, that we have interceptors in the ground, and that each month and each quarter and each year, additional pieces of it will evolve and be added.”
Excerpt from press conference:
Q: Mr. Secretary, do you expect to declare any sort of operational status for your missile defense system in 2004? If not, when do you plan on doing that? And also, does the recent results from the recent missile defense test cause you any concern about the deterrent effect of such a system?
SEC. RUMSFELD: The last portion of your question first. One always would wish that every element of a test environment would be perfect, and they never are. That’s true in any research and development or high technology effort in any field in any country anywhere in the world. I’m told that, with respect to the recent test, that they—the normal sequencing would be to have a series of interceptors prepared and ready to fire, and in the event the first assigned interceptor missile had a computer signal that something wasn’t right, it automatically chops over to the second one and the second one would fire. This test did not have it in sequence; it was just to test a single one. And as a result, it didn’t fire, and they’ll then go into that and figure it out.
And I must say, having been in the research and development business over the years—pharmaceuticals and electronics and various other things—the interesting thing, people think of those as failures. Most people think of them as learning experiences; that is, it is that process of trying things and learning from it that enables one to step ahead and advance science and technology. So the answer to your question is no. It’s expected that there will be things like that that will occur.
The first part of your question’s—(chuckles)—a little harder. It would be nice and neat if every system was either in development or operational.
In this case that’s not going to happen.
What we have here is a developmental system that is well along and there are interceptors in the ground, and at some point soon it will have a modest capability, but it will still be in a test phase, it will still be in a developmental phase, it will still be, as happens with other systems over time, being perfected and improved. They have developed the command and control procedures; the rules of engagement are being developed; the testing of safety in various procedures have been exercised.
And I can’t answer your question as to when or if we would have an announcement, but I would guess that the announcement would be very much like what I just said; that we are proceeding, that we have interceptors in the ground, and that each month and each quarter and each year, additional pieces of it will evolve and be added.
Q: Can I ask a follow-up, sir? The administration had made very clear that it wanted to have an early operational capability that would switch from a test scenario to an operational scenario as needed in 2004. Are you backing off of that?
And also, does the issue with the test that you mentioned as to not having a backup rocket there like you normally would operationally indicate that maybe you need to test as you would operate, as opposed to just having sort of isolated testing scenarios?
SEC. RUMSFELD: Eventually you would test as you would operate, and I don’t know that they didn’t have an additional interceptor prepared, if available. But that’s not what they were testing. They were not testing the ability to move from one interceptor to another to another in the event there is a computer signal which says that this interceptor isn’t prepared. That wasn’t what they were testing. So, you know—and the other portion of your question…
(To General Myers) You correct me if I’m—
GEN. MYERS: No, you’re exactly right.
SEC. RUMSFELD: You’re more knowledge about this than I am.
We had hoped that we would have some sort of a characterization that in 2004 we had a preliminary capability, an initial capability. I don’t mean an initial operating capability, I mean a very modest capability. I don’t know that that’s not true today. I’m not announcing it, but if you, for example, said that there was some reason to—that there was some threat that was evolving and it would be desirable to go out of a test mode and see the extent to which you could be in an operational mode, my impression is it wouldn’t take long to get there.
GEN. MYERS: That’s correct.
SEC. RUMSFELD: But we don’t see that threat.
Therefore, we’re not pressured. Our task at the—in the immediate period is to get it right and to keep working on it.
(Article)» Dec. 22: DoD transcript of Rumsfeld press conference
» More stories on: Deployment
