NARRATOR: The world's most terrifying weapon of war is the long-range ballistic missile. Traveling thousands of miles at speeds faster than a bullet, a single missile armed with nuclear warheads can destroy a major city, killing millions of people.

For forty years American scientists have tried, and failed, to develop a system to protect the United States from a missile attack. Shooting down enemy missiles in outer space-the goal of the so-called Star Wars program-seemed impossible.... Until last October.

TITLE SEQUENCE: "...television for changing times."

INTRODUCTION:

NARRATOR: Since 1959, the United States and Russia have possessed long-range missiles tipped with nuclear weapons. Using these missiles, either country can devastate the other at the push of a button.

For decades, both countries have worked to develop a system to protect themselves from a long-range missile attack. But such efforts always seemed to lead to a dead end-the technology for shooting missiles out of the sky simply didn't exist. When it came to global nuclear war, it seemed the only defense was a strong offense.

The American and Russian militaries built tens of thousands of nuclear warheads, and placed them atop missiles in submarines, on mobile launching pads, or in underground silos. The theory was that enough of these missiles would survive a nuclear attack to retaliate and destroy the attacking country. This theory became known as Mutual Assured Destruction, or MAD.

In 1972, the United States and Russia embraced MAD by signing the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, or ABM, which prohibits nationwide defenses against long-range missiles. Their rationale was that as long as both sides remained defenseless, neither country would dare attack the other.

The idea of a national missile defense was all but abandoned until 1982, when a panel of retired military leaders, known today as High Frontier, urged president Ronald Reagan to revive the issue. Major General Milnor Roberts, a former chief of the Army Reserves, is a founding member of High Frontier.

ROBERTS: We've been relying on mutual assured destruction, or MAD, and we think that is mad. And of course, that's the theory that if someone throws a missile at you, you throw one back. If you kill millions of our people, we'll kill millions of yours. Well, we think there's a better solution. Let's not kill people, let's just knock down the missiles.

NARRATOR: President Reagan strongly supported a national missile defense, believing it would finally liberate the United States from the nuclear stalemate with Russia.

REAGAN: "I call upon the scientific community, the same ones who gave us nuclear weapons, to give us the means to make these weapons impotent and obsolete...."

ROBERTS: So Reagan came out with something that is known as the Strategic Defense Initiative. SDI. And the press made fun of it in those days and started calling it "Star Wars," which of course was a put-down.

NARRATOR: SDI called for a system which would protect US territory from an all-out Soviet attack, using satellite weapons and laser beams to shoot down thousands of missiles outside the earth's atmosphere. Critics ridiculed the program's exotic technology and enormous costs, and the program was dogged by reports of waste and mismanagement. By the time President Reagan left office, SDI had consumed more than $20 billion dollars, with no tangible results. When the Soviet Union disbanded in 1991, Star Wars likewise seemed to fade into history.

But in 1995, a newly-elected Republican majority, intent on reviving Reagan's dream, took control of Congress. The new Congress increased the funding, and the political pressure, for Star Wars. In 1996, President Clinton agreed to push forward with a new, smaller-scale version of Star Wars.

The new system would be designed to protect US territory from an accidental, unauthorized, or terrorist launch of a few long-range missiles.

The Pentagon has focused on the following design for the system:

When an enemy missile is launched, its hot exhaust is detected by infrared sensors orbiting high above the earth. That data is fed to a second set of orbiting sensors and to ground-based radar stations, which begin to track the missile, feeding detailed data to a control center. This center then relays the information to an interceptor missile.

22 minutes after the enemy missile is launched, the interceptor is fired toward its target. About seven minutes later, the interceptor releases a 100-lb. projectile known as the "kill vehicle", which then has 38 seconds to locate the enemy warhead and maneuver into its path. A head-on collision--100 miles above the earth at speeds approaching 15,000 mph--destroys the warhead.

In the summer of 2000, the Clinton Administration will decide whether or not the new National Missile Defense system is ready for prime time. If the Administration approves the design, construction of the $27 billion dollar system could begin as soon as next year.

The Administration has pledged to look at a number of factors in making its decision. Is there a threat to justify building the system right away? Will the system really work against that threat? And how will the decision affect our relations with other countries, especially the other nuclear powers? With the decision just a few months away, there are still no easy answers to these questions.

NARRATOR: Today only two countries, Russia and China, are known to possess missiles capable of reaching US territory. According to the Director of the CIA, an attack from Russia or China is highly unlikely.

TENET: ....we are all familiar with Russian and Chinese capabilities to strike at military and civilian targets throughout the United States. To a large degree, we expect our mutual deterrent and diplomacy to help protect us from this, as they have for much of the last century.

NARRATOR: But there is widespread concern that other potential enemies, like North Korea, Iran, and Iraq, may be on the verge of developing their own long-range missiles. Just how serious and how urgent this threat might be has been hotly debated on Capitol Hill for the last five years.

Between 1995 and 1998, the CIA issued four reports on the emerging missile threat. Each report reached the same conclusion: apart from Russia and China, no potentially hostile country would have a missile capable of hitting the United States until at least the year 2010.

But Missile Defense supporters in Congress appointed their own panel, known as the Rumsfeld Commission, to assess the missile threat.

The Commission warned that a country like North Korea could field a long-range missile within just a few years.

William Schneider, a former state department official, was a member of the Rumsfeld Commission.

SCHNEIDER: Ballistic missile defense is the area where for a variety of reasons we have not engaged. And as a result, just as if electricity were present, the path of least resistance has been taken by those for whom it is important to maintain a threat against the United States.

NARRATOR: The test-firing of a three-stage rocket by North Korea in 1998 took the CIA by surprise, and seemed to confirm the Rumsfeld commission's findings. While the missile blew up early in flight, it provided evidence that the North Koreans were moving ahead more quickly than many had thought.

COCHRAN: This missile demonstrated that despite the economic difficulties and isolation of North Korea, it has made impressive progress in developing a multi-stage ballistic missile, capable of flying to intercontinental ranges....

NARRATOR: By 1999, the CIA had changed its outlook, reporting to Congress that North Korea could field a long-range missile in as little as five years, and that other countries would soon follow.

TENET: Over the next 15 years... our cities will face ballistic missile threats from a wider variety of actors-North Korea, probably Iran, and possibly Iraq... And while the missile arsenals of these countries will be fewer in number, constrained to smaller payloads, and less reliable than those of the Russians and Chinese, they will still pose a lethal and less predictable threat.

NARRATOR: While neither the Rumsfeld Commission nor the CIA make any actual recommendations about a National Missile Defense System, their bleak reports provided plenty of ammunition to the system's advocates. Indeed, Missile Defense supporters seemed almost grateful for the bad news.

INHOFE: I want to compliment you for coming straight forward and telling us the truth. I have criticized this administration in the past for covering up the threat that's facing us…. and finally we're getting the truth, and the American people have a wake-up call, and I wanna tell you how much I appreciate it.

NARRATOR: In the wake of the Rumsfeld Commission report and the North Korean missile launch, Congress passed the National Missile Defense Act of 1999. The law requires the Pentagon to field a limited system "as soon as technologically possible."

Last October, the design team tested the system's ability to hit a target outside the earth's atmosphere. 16 years after President Reagan first demanded a missile shield, the Star Wars program finally had its first successful intercept.

But the October flight test did not proceed as smoothly as it appeared. Due to a software problem, the kill vehicle became temporarily "lost" as soon as it was released from the missile, and was unable to locate its target. Instead the kill vehicle tracked a large balloon being used as a decoy. When, by chance, the warhead drifted into the kill vehicle's field of vision, the kill vehicle identified and collided with it.

The next flight test, in January 2000, failed due to a malfunction in the kill vehicle. With only one flight test remaining before a presidential decision is due, these results leave serious doubt as to whether Star Wars can possibly be proven to work in such a short time.

COLLINA: Judging on the basis of the first two intercept tests, we're very early, in a very immature program, which will not be ready for a deployment decision this summer.

NARRATOR: Tom Collina is Director of the Arms Control and International Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.

COLLINA: The first test hit its target, but it did it in a very roundabout way.... The second test just flat-out missed.... And that's not a basis on which you make a deployment decision, clearly.

NARRATOR: Apart from the mixed results of flight tests so far, the testing program itself is rife with shortcomings. The number of flight tests has been cut dramatically, in part due to each test's $100 million price tag, and political pressure to speed up the process.

GAGNON: For me, the most important thing is that originally they were gonna have 19 of these tests of the NMD system. And now they're saying they're only gonna have three before they go and recommend to the President whether or not the deployment should occur immediately.

NARRATOR: Bruce Gagnon is Coordinator of the Global Network Against Nuclear Power and Weapons in Space.

GAGNON: We know that the first test, they had more trouble with it than they'd like to admit, and now with the second test, the failure, I think this indicates that they're moving much too quickly. They're trying to push this whole system much sooner than they really have it down technologically.

NARRATOR: Apart from being so few in number, tests of the Star Wars system are far from realistic. None of the flight tests planned for this year will even use the complete system, since several key components haven't been built yet.

The booster rocket, which launches the interceptor toward the enemy missile, will not be ready before the year 2001. The $7 billion network of space-based sensors will not be available until at least 2006. When this equipment does become available, it may perform differently than the surrogates now being used in flight tests.

The targets being used in the intercept tests are also unrealistic. Thus far, they have been much easier to locate and destroy than real enemy missiles.

COLLINA: we have to assume that if North Korea can put up a long-range missile, and put a weapon of mass destruction on it, like a nuclear warhead, they can also do countermeasures.

NARRATOR: Countermeasures are steps an attacking enemy could take to confuse and defeat missile defenses. When a rocket releases its warhead outside the earth's atmosphere, additional objects can be released as decoys. In the vacuum of outer space, the decoys will move with about the same speed and direction as the warhead.

COLLINA: Let's say you've got 50 balloons up there. These are mylar balloons, the kind of thing you might buy in a supermarket, for a birthday party. And you've got one warhead amongst those fifty balloons. These balloons are such that radar can't see through them, the infrared sensor can't discriminate which one's got the warhead and which one doesn't, you've got to shoot them all... So we have to assume that's part of the threat, and therefore we have to test the system against that kind of threat. And that's not being done.

NARRATOR: Since these sorts of countermeasures are available today, by the time the Third-World missile threat becomes a reality, the Star Wars system could be obsolete. If Iran, Iraq, or North Korea is intent on threatening the United States, they have the luxury of time to ensure that their missiles can defeat American defenses.

COLLINA: Certainly in this case it's much easier for the offense than the defense. And the reason is the defense has to be fielded first. And then an attacker can sit back and say, OK, what are the sensors going to be, what is the interceptor going to be able to do? And then, plan your attack accordingly .... So the defense always has a harder job.

NARRATOR: The rush to deploy an untested missile defense system, against an unknown threat, could leave the United States with a system which affords little protection.

COLLINA: ...the real question is not whether that's a threat, but whether this system, the National Missile Defense System as proposed, would be effective against that threat. And our answer is no.

NARRATOR: Whether or not Star Wars actually works, it could severely strain America's relations with other nuclear powers. Both Russia and China remain highly suspicious of American intentions, and both have strenuously objected to Star Wars.

They feel that even a limited American missile defense will jeopardize their ability to retaliate if the United States launches a surprise missile attack against them. As a result, Star Wars may force Russia and China to build and maintain a bigger arsenal of nuclear missiles, and keep them ready to fire at a moment's notice.

According to Joseph Cirincione of Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, deploying Star Wars could create greater dangers than those posed by Iran, Iraq, or North Korea's missiles.

CIRINCIONE: ….if the international security regime is fundamentally altered by poorer relations between the United States and Russia, or poor relations between the United States and China, we could be facing a much more dangerous threat from those existing arsenals than we are likely to encounter from the potential arsenals of these three small states.

NARRATOR: Why would the Clinton Administration risk reviving the nuclear arms race, in order to deploy a system which, in all likelihood, will not work? One possible answer is that four of America's top aerospace corporations have large stakes in the Star Wars program. Lockheed Martin is developing the interceptor missiles. The kill vehicle is made by Raytheon. TRW is building the ground control center, and Boeing has been tasked to make all these technologies work together. In 1997 and 1998, these four companies combined spent $34 million on lobbying Congress, and contributed $7 million to Congressional election campaigns.

GAGNON: So what you must look at, then, is what is the real reason for this push towards deployment, and I think, clearly, it's money. It's the aerospace corporations wanting to get an OK on moving the arms race into space.

NARRATOR: The rush to deploy the National Missile Defense system, combined with the strong possibility that the system will be ineffective, suggests that today's version of Star Wars is only the beginning.

COLLINA: Once you spend $20 to $50 billion dollars putting up a system, and when people realize that it's not going to be effective, against even the most basic threats out there, the call will be to improve the system.

GAGNON: It is the first step. It is the Trojan Horse. And following that, already, right now, TRW, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, they're working on follow-on technologies. They have the funding. And they are developing them today. They will soon be deployed-space-based lasers, we're talking about-that will have offensive capability. That will have the ability to hit targets in space, and down to the earth.

NARRATOR: The space-based laser is an orbiting satellite which would detect and destroy long-range missiles in their first few minutes of flight, before any warheads or countermeasures can be deployed.

ROBERTS: It would be designed for missile defense. But there's also the possibility of space-based lasers knocking down enemy satellites. And it's presumed that the opponents' satellites (are) taking a good look at the United States. And if you got into a war you'd wanna knock those down.

NARRATOR: An orbiting weapon capable of such precise attacks could become one of the most potent offensive weapons ever.

GAGNON: So the BMD system is the way to get the American people to support the idea of having space weapons. By calling them defensive. And then, the follow-on technologies that will soon be deployed thereafter, will be the way that they come in and begin the actual deployment of offensive weapons in space.

NARRATOR: Whether or not Star Wars can really neutralize the missile forces of other countries, it will leave the rest of the world feeling more vulnerable to American military power. In a world still on edge from America's bombings of Yugoslavia, Iraq, and the Sudan, few countries are likely to trust the United States to use its newest technologies for purely defensive purposes. In fact, a national missile defense might make the United States an even more aggressive player on the world stage.

GAGNON: ....it is only going to create tensions between countries, it is only gonna make warfare even more likely and even more possible, and it's even gonna make the United States--the government of the United States--more secure in thinking that we can go ahead and utilize these systems, because we have this control and dominance.

CONCLUSION

NARRATOR: If the third-world missile threat were to become an immediate danger, if Star Wars could really be proven to work, and if building the system would not increase the likelihood of a nuclear war with Russia, then it would be irresponsible not to deploy a missile defense system. But today, not one of these conditions has been fulfilled.

Even so, against the backdrop of the 2000 presidential election campaign, these criteria have taken a back seat to political considerations, which favor approving the Star Wars system.

COLLINA: There's a presidential election going on. If Al Gore is in trouble, and he needs the defense vote, facts will not matter.

NARRATOR: Clinton Administration officials, including advocates of arms control, fear that delaying Star Wars could set back their cause in two ways. First, Vice President Gore's presidential campaign could suffer from accusations that the current administration has left the country vulnerable to a missile attack.

COLLINA: … most politicians, particularly Democrats, were just fearful… that anyone who opposed the system would be seen as unpatriotic and anti-defense, and no politician wants to be seen like that.

NARRATOR: Second, if deployment of a modest missile defense system is delayed, the next president may decide to push for a more ambitious, expensive, and provocative version of Star Wars. While this is indeed a real possibility, it does not justify giving the green light to an unproven missile defense.

COLLINA: It will be the height of irresponsibility to politicize a decision that really should be a technical one. And the technology says this system ain't ready to go.

NARRATOR: Building any Star Wars system would violate the ABM treaty, and Russia has already indicated that it would stop reducing its nuclear forces if the US builds a national missile defense. This is a large risk to take in order to counter a Third-World missile threat which still does not exist.

CIRINCIONE: …. much more attention has to be focused on the here and now, on the 5,000 nuclear warheads that sit atop ballistic missiles in Russia. That is the ballistic missile threat we really should be worried about.…

NARRATOR: The United States still has time to explore more reliable, less expensive, and less provocative measures to counter the missile threat.

COLLINA: We're working with North Korea to stop its missile development program. We should keep doing that kind of thing. Working with Russia ... to reduce their nuclear forces that would otherwise be aimed at us. These are very successful, proven programs, and we need to pursue them more vigorously.

NARRATOR: As long as missile defense technology remains unproven, the threat remains unknown, and the real implications for America's security remain unclear, Star Wars will remain an idea whose time has not yet come.