Agence France-Presse,
Washington: Senators and congressmen from western states are seeking to prevent changes or cuts to the U.S. force of deployed nuclear-armed ICBMs. Currently, 500 Minuteman III missiles are dispersed across Montana, North Dakota, and Wyoming.
The legislators are worried that the Department of Defense's upcoming Quadrennial Defense Review (QDR) might recommend cutting some ICBMs or converting some of them to carry conventional warheads, Arms Control Today reported in its November edition.
The controversy could lead to a clash between the Bush administration and some of its most powerful Republican supporters on Capitol Hill.
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, backed by President George W. Bush, remains determined to streamline the U.S. domestic military deployment, including nuclear deployments, away from their huge Cold War configuration and make them more suitable to the war on terror currently being waged.
However, key senators have endorsed legislation reaffirming support for the existing ICBM force, and a trio of House Republicans has offered a bill with a similar purpose, ACT said.
In the Senate, Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner, R-Va., and ranking member Carl Levin, D-Mich., have agreed to include as part of the pending defense authorization bill a statement that it is U.S. policy to continue deploying 500 ICBMs unless international developments warrant a change. This language, if adopted, would not be legally binding, ACT said.
Reps. Dennis Rehberg, R-Mont., Barbara Cubin, R-Wyo., and Rob Bishop, R-Utah, introduced a bill Oct. 7 declaring, “It is the policy of the United States to maintain a land-based intercontinental ballistic missile force of 500 Minuteman III missiles.” It has been referred to the House Armed Services Committee, and it is uncertain when the committee might consider the proposal, ACT said.
In a Sept. 21 letter to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the 10 senators from Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming urged against cutting back on the ICBM force because it “represents a nearly insurmountable hedge against strategic surprise.”
