The Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano, blogging at Big Peace, writes about his skepticism over Defense Secretary Robert Gates supporting the new START. Missile defense experts and others are concerned that the president has compromised our nation’s security to obtain Russia’s cooperation in dealing with Iran.

“When Republican presidential aspirant Mitt Romney went off on the White House, the White House noticed,” Carafano writes. “In a withering column in the Washington Post, Romney labeled the New START arms control agreement ‘Obama’s Worst Foreign Policy Mistake.’ That did not sit well with Obama. The administration has been trying to fast-track Senate ratification of the treaty. The president’s concern over the Romney speed-bump is apparent. Mr. Obama quickly dispatched Defense Secretary Robert Gates to launch what The Hill dubbed  ‘a 2012 proxy fight with Mitt Romney.’”

The move had a limited pay-off, says Carafano. Republicans apparently are swayed by Gates’s support of START. The question is, “Why do Republicans trust Gates?”

Read the full post here.

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said it is “technically feasible” to expand NATO’s theater missile defense system, which would protect thousands of deployed troops. (Source)

“Even at a time when budgets are tight – especially at a time when budgets are tight – that is the kind of investment that makes sense,” Rasmussen said. Linking up the national systems would cost about $239 million over 10 years.

In February, Defense Secretary Robert Gates spoke at the NATO Strategic Concept Seminar at the Atlantic Council. He said Europe had underfunded defense budgets for NATO, and consequently, undermined joint security. Land invasion is no longer a pressing threat. The danger of missile attacks is more critical and “more likely to come from outside NATO’s traditional borders; and more likely to require new approaches that incorporate far more than just military power.” (Source)

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also spoke at the seminar about Russia and NATO working together. Russia believes expanding NATO and extending its reach threaten its national security. Relations between NATO and Russia soured after NATO criticized the former Soviet Union for invading Georgia. Despite this, NATO seeks to work with Russia on missile defense.

Last month, U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates spoke at the Atlantic Council to discuss factors that should be considered as NATO drafts a new “Strategic Concept,” which defines NATO’s purpose, nature, and security tasks.

Among other things, Gates said Europe has underfunded defense budgets for NATO, and consequently, has undermined joint security. He noted the importance of missile defense, as land invasion is no longer a pressing threat. The danger of missile attacks is more critical and “more likely to come from outside NATO’s traditional borders; and more likely to require new approaches that incorporate far more than just military power.”

This week, Gates is visiting Saudi Arabia to meet with King Abdullah to discuss missile defense and Iran’s nuclear ambitions. In addition to deploying missile shields to Poland and Romania, the U.S. seeks to expand missile defense capabilities in the Persian Gulf. Specifically, the plan is to place the Patriot missile defense batteries in four Persian Gulf states and Standard Missile-3 missile defense interceptors on Navy ships in the Gulf. Although these steps will permit a defense against shorter-range missiles, they won’t provide a defense to the U.S. or our allies against the longer-range missiles Iran wants to build.

Gates will also discuss tougher sanctions against Iran. Pentagon press secretary Geoff Morrell said, “It’s not lost on the Iranians, all of the security cooperation that’s been going on for years now and all the systems that have been purchased over the last several years, (are) all designed to counter-weight and protect against the growing threat posed by Iran.” (Reuters)

U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton both spoke at the Atlantic Council this week to discuss factors that should be considered as NATO drafts a new “Strategic Concept,” which defines NATO’s purpose, nature, and security tasks.

Secretary Gates said Europe has underfunded defense budgets for NATO, and consequently, has undermined joint security. Specifically, he mentioned missile defense. Land invasion is no longer a pressing threat. The danger of missile attacks is more critical and “more likely to come from outside NATO’s traditional borders; and more likely to require new approaches that incorporate far more than just military power.” (Source)

On the president’s new missile defense policy: “Last year, the Obama administration announced a new plan for missile defense in Europe – a phased, adaptive approach that will give us real capabilities in a shorter period of time than the previous plan. We consider this a U.S.-funded contribution to NATO missile defense, which is critical to the collective-defense mission to protect our populations, territory, and forces.”

Iran is focusing on short- and medium-range missiles, but its long-range capability also poses a threat, whether the capability reaches fruition next year or five years from now. One of the top funding priorities is missile defense. The U.S. and our allies must prepare for long-range weapons, particularly from countries outside NATO that defy the U.N. Security Council.

In scaling back Bush-era missile defense policy, including reducing interceptors in Alaska and California, the Obama administration has left the U.S. vulnerable to long-range ballistic missiles and jeopardized systems like Ground-based Midcourse Defense. In assessing the missile threat, however, the administration seems to realize the need for more, not less, funding for these programs.

Secretary Gates acknowledged the importance of missile defense in his speech, but funding (or the lack thereof) reflects priority. We hope the administration restores missile defense funding and keeps all our options open. Read Gates’s full remarks.

Sources are reporting that the president now wants to meet with Iran by September to discuss the matter and will consider tougher sanctions against Iran if it fails to comply. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is on a tour of the Middle East this week. (Source)

Gates said, “What is clear is if the engagement process is not successful, the United States is prepared to press for significant additional sanctions that would be non-incremental” and added that “The president is certainly anticipating or hoping for some kind of a response this fall, perhaps by the time of the UN General Assembly (in September).”

From our perspective, Obama seems to be hedging, hoping Iran with comply with a September deadline on its own. Of course, it won’t. Aside from international condemnation, what consequences has Iran faced because of its defiance? Would the rogue state react the same way if George Bush were still in office?

Despite Iran’s nuclear program and the country’s clear intentions to continue developing nuclear capabilities, Obama wants to reduce missile defense spending by $1.4 billion. As the Heritage Foundation’s James Carafano notes, ballistic missiles are the best weapons we have to stop enemy attacks that would have devastating consequences. But opponents of strong missile defense can’t see the forest for the trees. Iran and rogue cousin North Korea may not have the capability to cause untold damage now, but they will.

“Defense Secretary Robert Gates takes the threat seriously enough to have positioned a military ground-based missile defense system to protect Hawaii from missile attack, Rehbein writes. “While The American Legion applauds this decision, the nation’s largest veterans service organization is concerned that the United States is not doing enough to protect us from, well, nuclear annihilation.”

Although nuclear threats loom over us, the Obama administration intends to cut $1.62 billion from the missile defense budget. As we’ve noted before, the administration’s cuts impact Ground-Based Midcourse Defense Interceptors, which would be reduced from 44 to 30.

“The Heritage Foundation has produced a chilling documentary titled ‘33 Minutes: Protecting America in the New Missile Age.’ A trailer of the film can be viewed at www.legion.org. It makes the sobering point that a ballistic missile fired at the United States could reach its target in 33 minutes or less. It is a moral imperative that our leaders in Washington protect America from this catastrophic possibility.”

Watch the trailer of the high-definition documentary:

“Without telegraphing what we will do,” Gates said, “I would just say I think we are in a good position should it become necessary to protect American territory.”

Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman Navy Adm. Mike Mullen said the U.S. intends “to vigorously enforce the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1874″ and search North Korean ships suspected of carrying weapons. As we noted earlier this week, North Korea has threatened retaliation if its ships are stopped and searched. What will happen if the rogue state refuses our requests? Mullen said the U.S. could “direct it to go into a port, and the country of that port would…inspect the vessel.”

What are our options if North Korea chooses to escalate if its ships are stopped? Mullen didn’t answer the question directly. He reiterated that the U.N. Security Council’s resolution speaks for the international community and its commitment to contain North Korea.

“It’s not just the United States, it’s a lot of other countries as well. And the north’s steps to further isolate itself, to further noncomply with international guidance and regulations, in the long-run, puts them in a more difficult position.”

FOX News reports that the U.S. will send the U.S.S. John McCain to intercept a flagged North Korean ship that may have weapons aboard. The navy destroyer will intercept the Kang Nam when it leaves a location off China’s coast.

White House National Security Council spokesman Mike Hammer, who didn’t comment directly about a third nuclear test, said in a statement, “We have come to expect North Korea to act recklessly and dangerously. But while the world unites to pass a strong new Security Council resolution, it is clear that North Korea’s behavior is succeeding only in further isolating itself.”

President Barack Obama may freeze North Korea’s accounts in foreign banks as sanctions, but he’ll likely try to talk to North Korea first. No doubt he prefers six party talks, but admitted that such talks haven’t been effective in the past. North Korea is set to conduct a third nuclear test and has threatened to launch long-range missiles. At this point, having a discussion about its defiance seems futile. In fact, Stephen Bosworth, special envoy to the president, said North Korea has “spurned” attempts to talk.

Last month, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the U.S. has 30 ground-based missile interceptors in place to counteract missiles from North Korea. He also said the Obama administration planned to shift funds away from weapons and research for future conflicts and focus on weapons needed for the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Perhaps the president will reassess this decision in the wake of North Korea’s rumored nuclear test.

Gates said this about former President Vladimir Putin: “When I first met with President Putin and talked about this, he basically dismissed the idea that the Iranians would have a missile that would have the range to reach much of Western Europe and much of Russia before 2020 or so. And he showed me a map that his intelligence guys had prepared. And I told him he needed a new intelligence service.”

It’s common knowledge Russia opposes our plans to build missile shields in Poland and the Czech Republic. Russia called the bases threats, unconvinced that their purpose is to protect Central Europe. The former Soviet state is changing its tune, thanks to Iran’s desire and determination to possess nuclear power.

As irony would have it, we now have a president in the White House who is not committed to building the shields.

U.S. defense contractors are very interested in talks between the two countries, as their programs are at stake in the wake of defense budget cuts. Northrop Grumman wants the Department of Defense to lift a stop-work order so it can move forward with a test flight of the Kinetic Energy Interceptor (KEI).

Northrop spokesman Bob Bishop said, “Taxpayers have invested some $1.1 billion in KEI over the last five-plus years. It would be a shame to spend that money without a test to prove whether the technology works and forego an opportunity to gather valuable data on this first-of-a-kind, high-acceleration agile missile.”

The Obama administration has proposed to cut $1.4 billion from the missile defense budget.

(Source: Voice of America and Reuters)

If you plan to attend, please RSVP at the event web page.

In other North Korea-related news, the Missile Defense Agency says the U.S. military has improved its ability to shoot down long-range missiles North Korea could be gearing up to launch. The military conducted a test simulating an attack from North Korea on December 5. (Source)

This news comes in the wake of U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates’s statement that “there were some signs” North Korea will launch a Taepodong-2, a long-range missile with a reported range of 6,200 miles. Last year, it was reported that North Korea was building a missile launch site capable of firing advanced rockets.