By Brian T. Kennedy
October 10, 1997
Of course, no one is advocating a return to the Cold War. But that conflict brought stability. In today’s world that would be welcome. The fall of the Soviet Union has led to the disintegration of important nuclear safeguards and opened the way for terrorist states to be more dangerous than ever.
Alexander Lebed, Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s former national security adviser, admitted last spring that the Russian Federation couldn’t account for over 50 nuclear bombs built into suitcases. Although Russian officials at first denied the existence of the bombs, last week Russian scientist and Yeltsin adviser Alexi Yablokov confirmed that indeed the bombs were built and designed for terrorist purposes.
One can only presume that America was the target.
Unfortunately this could be more than just a case of misplaced goods. There are willing buyers for nuclear technology. Russian military profiteers may be selling Russian nuclear weapons to terrorist states such as Iran, Iraq and North Korea.
As for the spread of Russian missiles, reports out of Israel claim Iran is trying to purchase advanced missile technology.
Officially, the Russian government is only building Iran’s nuclear power plant—the platform from which weapons-grade nuclear materials can be produced. Some Russian “corporations” however, are willing to sell their Cold War know-how. Some are upgrading Iranian guidance systems, and others may be passing on plans for the Russian SS-4 liquid fueled missile.
This would give Iranian missiles a range of 1,250 miles—well within range of Tel Aviv.
And despite its economic woes, Russia continues to develop and modernize advanced nuclear missiles. The new generation of SS-X-26 and SS-X-27 missiles are reportedly faster, more accurate, and less detectable by radar than older missiles.
Russian intent may be benign, but is at best hard to read. For all his talk of a new Russia, Yeltsin has specifically rejected the former Soviet policy of “no first use” of nuclear weapons.
As always, the challenge isn’t to divine the intentions of other nations. The challenge is to be prepared.
If “suitcase nukes” can be lost or long-range missiles bought, then the post-Cold War world demands more, not less, vigilance. That’s why the U.S. should move quickly to improve our intelligence methods and to develop defenses against ballistic missile attack.
America already has the technology to deploy an effective missile defense.
Although experts agree that a space-based system will be more desirable in the future, a sea-based wide-area defense made up of existing Aegis cruisers could be in place in five years for $2 billion to $3 billion.
Last year, a Chinese official told a U.S. official that China could act militarily against Taiwan without fear of intervention by the U.S because American leaders “care more about Los Angeles than they do about Taiwan.” If a missile defense were deployed, this nuclear threat would be largely irrelevant.
One thing stands between the deployment of a ballistic missile defense and the security of the U.S.: the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. This Cold War treaty was signed with the Soviet Union, a state that no longer exists. But there will be serious efforts by the Clinton administration in the coming year to have the Senate ratify an expanded treaty. That would cripple our future ability to defend the U.S. from nuclear attack.
Many Americans believe that the U.S. already has a missile defense. Others know better. U.S. policy-makers would do well to heed the warnings from Russia and act to defend America now.
