Good morning! Thank you for attending this morning, and thank you Mac for inviting me today.
I
know you've already heard a few of the real experts discuss Directed
Energy (D.E.) technology and its implications for U.S. national
security. Today, I'd like to offer a different perspective on
some of the implications of deploying Directed Energy weapons....-Not
just budgetary issues, but operational and policy implications as
well.
II. D.E. IN OUTER-SPACE
Given the success
to-date of current DE development programs, such as the Tactical
High-Energy Laser (THEL) and Air-borne Laser (ABL), we know that
Directed Energy systems will be deployable on the ground and in the
air. Some may even be deployed on the open seas. But
Space....I contend...is where the largest future payoff really lies.
D.E. technologies offer great promise for both managing activities in
space, and for dominating that space when its part of the military
battle-ground.
STAR WARS DEMAGOGUERY
When
discussing the kinds of things that fall under space-based directed
energy, however, some just think of "Star Wars." They envision
Luke Skywalker in an X-wing Starfighter.... shooting laser cannons and
proton torpedoes at the Imperial Death Star. Others think of President
Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), a program that -- though
it has not existed for years -- even today is endlessly demagogued.
In
fact, today, nearly any missile defense program -- whether or not it
even resembles SDI -- conveniently becomes a "Star Wars" program, as if
to say it's a federal boondoggle. Unfortunately, this demagoguery only
undermines the serious debate we need to have on programs that aim not
to destroy the Death Star, but to defend this great nation against
attacks whether on the homeland directly, or on our space assets-- on
which we are increasingly dependent.
SPACE-BASED LASER
Indeed,
as America and other industrialized nations become more dependent on
systems in space -- systems that provide sensory data, hi-resolution
imagery, or enable electronic communications or electronic commerce --
we ultimately will have to protect these assets from disruption and
destruction.
Moreover, the system that would protect our
space-based assets, will also serve to protect the homeland. The
Space-Based Laser, for example, is one viable technology that offers a
credible means to those ends. President Bush's decision to withdraw
from the ABM Treaty clearly has implications for on-going missile
defense programs on the ground, at sea and in the air.
It
also creates a new environment that unleashes a cache of scientists,
engineers and plenty of other smart people to push technology to the
outer limits of space - whether for missile defense, satellite defense
or other homeland protection requirements. Interestingly, the January
2001 Commission to Assess U.S. National Security Space Management and
Organization, chaired by Donald Rumsfeld, now our esteemed Defense
Secretary, unanimously concluded that it is in the U.S. national
interest to:
"Use the nation's potential in space to support its domestic, economic, diplomatic and national security objectives", and
"Develop
and deploy the means to deter and defend against hostile acts directed
at U.S. space assets and against the uses of space hostile to U.S.
interests."
These are not some lofty ideals that
we should discuss over tea sometime. They are tremendous yet
achievable goals we should diligently pursue. Why, you ask?
THREAT
Well, for one reason, the Space Commission warned us of the
potential for a highly disruptive "Space Pearl Harbor." But mainly
because of the disturbing trends in proliferation of foreign ballistic
missile and anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons technologies. In 1972, nine
countries had ballistic missiles. By 2001, at least 28 nations
had ballistic missiles, according to last December's Nuclear Posture
Review.
According to the latest National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)--
---
"the proliferation of ballistic missile-related technologies, materials
and expertise-- especially by Russian, Chinese and North Korean
entities- has enabled [other] emerging missile states to accelerate
missile development, acquire new capabilities and potentially develop
even more capable and longer range future systems."
These
include Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Pakistan. We also know that
some of the more industrialized nations are growing other offensive
space technologies, specifically anti-satellite capabilities. In
fact, in July 2000, a Chinese news agency reported that the PRC's
military is developing methods and strategies for defeating the U.S.
military in a high-tech and space-based future war.
Just as disturbing, the Space Commission noted:
"The
ability to restrict or deny freedom of access to and operations in
space is no longer limited to global military powers. Knowledge
of space systems and the means to counter them is increasingly
available on the international market."
What kinds of
technologies do we have, or could we have, to reduce our vulnerability
to these threats? Well, the more widely-known missile
defense systems such as the Ground-based Midcourse Defense segment and
the ABL will soon provide some substantive missile defenses. But
they'll be limited in their application, if not unable to completely
protect those assets in space.
So we ought to move expeditiously
to build and deploy space-based weapons, such as the Space-based Laser
and space-based interceptors.
III. DE's WARFIGHTING ROLE
Of course, the THEL system promises to provide tactical defenses on the ground.
ABL
will offer us tactical and strategic uses from the air. We might
even find a way to put lasers on ships and make them work on the rough
seas. All those systems of course require personnel to man the system,
putting them in harm's way. But it is the fourth area- Space- which I
contend owns the future.
The future of Directed Energy in
space will not only serve as a military "force-enhancer" for the
warfighter, but also a "force-applicator." By military force-enhancer,
I mean of course that we'll be able to use DE weapons in space to
protect assets such as the GPS-used for unit navigation, enemy
tracking, and precision-guided munitions.
It could protect
other vital communications systems, and our intelligence, surveillance
and reconnaissance platforms. It also would protect the free flow of
our civilian communications and commercial activities - especially
important as the military and intelligence communities become more
reliant on commercial space assets. Perhaps equally important,
space-based directed energy platforms might be used in applications of
force with truly global reach.
That is, SBL also could:
Debilitate enemy satellite systems;
Defeat enemy anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons;
Reach down and destroy ballistic missiles in the boost phase; and
I
suppose some day, it might be used to breakup asteroidal clusters
approaching the earth, unless you want to rely on Bruce Willis and his
team of Armageddon oil-well drillers.
All this
without having to put people directly in harm's way. Space is obviously
hard to access, so those who can get there will
