http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,245328-412,00.shtml

      America's Dream Defense

       a.. Critics Say The Missile Defense System Is Flawed
       b.. Claim Contractors Fraudulently Covered Up Failures
       c.. 60 Minutes II Observes Latest Missile Test, A Failure

       WASHINGTON, Dec. 26, 2000

             CBS
             A rocket carrying a kill vehicle stands by during the latest
 missile defense test.






       (CBS) With the election of George W. Bush as president, the top brass
 at the Pentagon have high hopes that their dream defense may be closer to
 reality.

       For years now, the military has been trying to develop a
 shield-over-the-nation missile defense system, one that could destroy
 incoming warheads in space - warheads with nuclear or biological weapons.
 The Clinton administration has been lukewarm about the $60 billion-plus
 system.

       But President-elect Bush and Secretary of State-designate Colin
Powell
 believe even more resources should be spent on this missile defense.

       As 60 Minutes II initially reported in October, the Pentagon allowed
 it to watch the most elaborate test yet of its latest system - a test using
 real rockets. The Pentagon was so confident that this new system would
work,
 it agreed on July 8 to let Dan Rather watch its most elaborate test yet -
 one using real rockets and sophisticated computer technology. The plan was
 to launch a real rocket over the Pacific carrying a mock warhead similar to
 one an enemy would use to attack and destroy Los Angeles or Chicago or New
 York.

       But there is also a group of leading scientists who believe the whole
 plan is fatally flawed and a bit of a fraud.
 --------------------------------------------------------------------------
       To the Pentagon, this missile defense system would be America's dream
 defense: a shield that would withstand virtually any strike, with more
 countries developing nuclear and biological weapons. The intelligence
 community believes a rocket carrying a nuclear or germ warhead could be
shot
 at the United States within five years by North Korea or Iran, and a few
 years later by Iraq.

       Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish is in charge of building a ballistic missile
 defense system to defend the country against such potential enemies. The
 test July 8 was intended to be similar to a real missile attack. "It
 simulates all the things that have to happen in a combat situation," Kadish
 said.

       The Pentagon's sophisticated and highly classified secret weapon for
a
 real combat situation is called a "kill vehicle." It is designed to find
and
 destroy the enemy warhead high above the surface of the Earth.

       In the event of a missile assault, Pentagon radar systems are
supposed
 to track the enemy warhead. Then the United States would launch the
 defensive rocket. In space, it would eject the kill vehicle, which would
 close in on the enemy warhead at a combined speed of 15,000 mph. It is
 called hitting a bullet with a bullet.

       Kadish knew there was a lot riding on the July demonstration. "The
 test is about $100 million so we want to make sure that it counts," he
said.

       In an earlier test last year, the Pentagon destroyed a warhead in
 space, but critics claim that one was oversimplified and inconclusive.

       And a previous test was a failure. The kill vehicle missed its
target,
 providing more ammunition for the Pentagon's critics that this is an
 expensive, unworkable boondoggle.

       The most outspoken critic, Ted Postol, said Kadish's system is doomed
 to fail. "Spending resources on doing serious scientific work on problems
 that are related to the ballistic missile defense problem is a perfectly
 appropriate thing for the United States to be doing," said Postol before
the
 July 8 test.

       "But we're not doing that. We're building things that have no chance
 of working instead," noted the physicist and MIT professor who was formerly
 a top U.S. Navy scientist.

       The White House has called Postol arrogant, and even his colleagues
 say he is blunt and in your face.

       But Postol does have a track record. In 1991, during the Gulf War,
the
 Pentagon was claiming that its Patriot missiles were 90 percent effective
in
 shooting down Saddam Hussein's crude but deadly SCUD missiles. After the
 war, Postol was the one concluding that the Patriots were nearly a complete
 failure.

       "We analyzed at MIT the Patriot performance," explained Postol. "And
 our analysis indicated that the Patriots probably did not destroy a single
 SCUD warhead. Probably, the performance was zero."

       After Postol's analysis, the Pentagon sharply lowered its estimate on
 the Patriot's performance.

       According to Postol, the Defense Department is misleading the public
 again about missile defense. He said the stakes are much higher this time.

       "Because if this system doesn't work, millions of people would die.
 This is a system that's supposed to defend people from nuclear attack. And
 if it doesn't work, lots of people would die," Postol said.

       Since the early 1980s, said Postol, the Pentagon has accomplished
very
 little in its effort to destroy enemy warheads in space - an effort that
 intensified when President Reagan talked about the initiative nicknamed
 "Star Wars."

       During the Reagan years, the U.S. Defense Department went on a
 spending spree, trying to build a shield in space to defend against a
 massive Soviet nuclear attack. There were gadgets called brilliant pebbles
 to smash enemy warheads and ground-based lasers. Billions of dollars were
 spent on research but no effective missile defense system was ever built.

       Now the Pentagon wants to funnel billions more into the new "kill
 vehicle" program. But there are reasons the system may not work. Before
 launching a rocket, an enemy can pack deflated balloons into it; later they
 are inflated and deployed with the warhead. The balloons camouflage the
 warhead or hide it; they can even be designed to completely enclose the
warhead, making it virtually disappear.

       "And these decoys are designed to make it difficult, or impossible,
 for the defense to understand where the warhead is relative to the decoys,"
 Postol said.

       And Postol believes if another country's military forces can reach
the
 point where they can manufacture intercontinental ballistic missiles and
the
 nuclear warheads to put on their tips, then it's safe to assume they can
 manufacture the decoys.

       Out in space, the decoys and warheads look much the same, like
distant
 points of flickering light, Postol said. And the infrared sensors on the
 kill vehicle couldn't be depended upon to tell them apart, he added.

       "Although I can't see any feature, they're just a point of light,
they
 might look a little brighter or dimmer," said Postol. "But the balloons are
 going to fluctuate in a way that's very similar to the way the warhead
 fluctuates. So the warheads and decoys all look roughly alike."

       The professor said the Pentagon can do the difficult job of shooting
 down a warhead in space - of hitting a bullet with a bullet - but not if
the
 warhead is surrounded by decoys. "If it can't tell the difference between
 warheads and decoys with a very, very high confidence, the system will
 collapse catastrophically."

       Kadish wanted to prove that Postol was wrong with the July 8 test.

       After midnight on July 8, at the underground command center at the
 Pentagon, it was almost time to launch a simulated nuclear attack on the
 United States.

       And Kadish's job was to shoot that target down. If this had been a
 real attack the response time would be short, he said. "The decision
 makers...would probably have five to eight minutes to decide to enable the
 system."

       Twenty-one minutes after the launch of the enemy rocket, it was time
 for Kadish's team to launch the second rocket, the defensive rocket with
the
 kill vehicle.

       "The interceptor launched and got off pretty good. So it's off to
 intercept. There it's going. And so we want to see it at a point in space
 where that 'kill vehicle' can open its infrared sensors and find the target
 and intercept," said Kadish as he monitored its progress.

       The infrared sensors had to tell the difference between the warhead
 and the decoys. In earlier tests, several balloon decoys were used. But in
 this test there was only one decoy. "It's more than zero," said Kadish.
"And
 just as we don't go supersonic on our first flight test of an airplane; we
 want to take this a step at a time."

       The Pentagon's critics say the sensors are so essential to this
system
 that tests are useless unless Kadish can prove the sensors can discriminate
 between the decoy and the warhead.

       But as things turned out, Kadish was not able to even test those
 much-criticized sensors. First, the one balloon decoy, designed to confuse
 the kill vehicle, did not inflate properly.

       "So the decoy is not going to look exactly like what we expected. It
 presents a problem for the system that we didn't expect," said Kadish.

       The general wasn't happy, but a few minutes later, he had an even
 bigger problem. The kill vehicle was still attached to its booster rocket -
 unable to separate for some reason - and therefore was unable to even try
to
 intercept the enemy warhead.

       If this had been a real attack, the warhead would have continued on
to
 its target.

       The July 8 test failed more fundamentally than even Postol could have
 imagined. But to him, the missile system is just another in a long list of
 failures dating back to tests in the Reagan years.

       "In Star Wars we were talking about X-ray lasers and they didn't
 work," said Postol. "We were talking about deuterium fluoride space-based
 lasers. They didn't work. We were talking about hydrogen fluoride lasers in
 space, and they didn't work. We were talking about neutral particle beams,
 and they didn't work. We were talking about charged particle beams, and
they
 didn't work, just went on and on and on. Now we're down to interceptors,
and
 they don't work."

       And Postol said the Defense Department has known that for years. One
 woman was warning the Pentagon back in 1996 that a major defense contractor
 was lying when it said the infrared sensor technology did work, Postol
said.

       Find out what this early critic had to say in A Far-Off Dream?
       d..
       e.. http://cbsnews.com/now/story/0,1597,245366-412,00.shtml
       f..
            A Far-Off Dream?

             g.. Critics Sound Off On Missile Defense Program
             h.. Defense Contractor Under Fire From Former Employees
             i.. Many On Capitol Hill Support The Program

             Dec. 26, 2000

                   CBS
                   MIT's Ted Postol is critical of the missile defense
 program.






             (CBS) Building an effective missile defense system will
 apparently be a top priority of the incoming Bush Administration.

             When President-elect Bush announced he would nominate General
 Colin Powell to be secretary of state, one of Powell's first statements was
 that the country needs a missile defense to thwart the "blackmail" of
 enemies who have long-range missiles.

             But as the Bush foreign policy team plans its dream defense, it
 might want to talk to MIT Professor Ted Postol, who says the whole system
 currently being tested by the Pentagon is fatally flawed. And he says the
 Defense Department and the Justice Department have known that for years.

             "When I talk fraud, I'm being careful about the use of the
 word," said Postol. "I'm not saying there are people who have made a
 mistake, and I disagree with them....I'm saying that there are people who
 know that this system will not work and are trying to cover it up. That's
 what I'm saying here. So I am making a serious charge, I know that."

             And Postol said Nira Schwartz provided him with the documents
 and data that prove it. In 1996, Schwartz was a senior staff engineer at
 TRW, a major defense contractor on the missile defense program. "That's
when
 I saw that the technology will not perform to the level that TRW reported
to
 the government," she said.

             And Schwartz said she is still certain it will not work. "I did
 more and more tests, which confirmed that the technology does not work and
 will not work with the technology of today."

             Schwartz, who was born in Israel, is an American citizen. She
 has a doctorate in physics and engineering and was hired by TRW to test the
 critical computer programs used to discriminate between warheads and
decoys.

             "The tests that I performed validated the level of performance
 of TRW to be only 10 percent of what they reported to the government," said
 Schartz. "They reported to the government 99.9 probability to differentiate
 the warhead out of the decoys and the replicas."

             But when she tried to bring the discrepancies to her superiors'
 attention, Schwartz was let go, she said. "I say to my boss, 'It is wrong,
 what we are doing; it is wrong.' And the next day, I was fired."

             Schwartz eventually sued TRW on behalf of the U.S. government,
 accusing the contractor of committing fraud and saying it "knowingly made
 false test plans, test procedures, test reports and presentations to the
 United States government...to remain in the...program."

             The Justice Department could have joined the lawsuit, but, at
 the urging of the Defense Department, did not. In court documents, TRW
 rejected all of Schwartz's assertions. The company declined a request for
an
 interview, but did send a written statement: "TRW scientists and engineers
 devoted years to this complex project, while Ms. Schwartz, in her six
months
 with the company, worked a mere 40 hours....Her understanding of the
 decisions made about this program is insufficient to lend any credibility
to
 her allegations."

             But Roy Danchick believes Schwartz is very credible. Danchick
is
 a mathematician who worked at TRW for 16 years. "She was fired because she
 pointed out to her superiors that the software, that the computer programs
 that they were building would not do the job of discrimination," he said.

             Before retiring, Danchick worked in the aerospace industry for
 40 years. At TRW, he worked on missile defense projects.

             "I actually worked in the laboratory, in the computational
 laboratory, with the people who were doing discrimination," recalled
 Danchick. "And I watched them struggle and trying to massage the data, and
 that's scientifically, statistically, mathematically impermissible."

             When the Pentagon started to look into these charges, it asked
 Danchick to contribute to an investigative report. "It is not a crime in
the
 research and development process to build...a failed computer program," he
 said. "That's part of the process. What is a crime is to claim that a
failed
 computer program actually works, does the job. That's fraud."

             A Pentagon criminal investigator did extensive interviews with
 Danchick and Schwartz. For three years after she was fired, Schwartz was
 allowed to keep her security clearance so that she could monitor the work
at
 TRW with the criminal investigator. That criminal investigator concluded
and
 reported back to the Department of Defense that there is "absolute
 irrefutable scientific proof that TRW's discrimination technology does not,
 cannot and will not work." He accused TRW of "knowingly covering up its
 failure."

             "I think Nira's telling the truth, and I think that the
 contractor, TRW, and the government, the Ballistic Missile Defense
 Organization, the Pentagon, for whatever reasons - and I, I've thought long
 and hard about it - I think they are not telling the truth," said Danchick.

             The criminal investigator, who is now retired, complained to
the
 Pentagon repeatedly that it was ignoring his findings against TRW. CBS News
 asked Lt. General Ron Kadish - the man now in charge of the missile defense
 program - about that investigation.

             "We take every accusation of that nature very seriously, and
 this happened in 1996, I believe," said Kadish. "And my predecessors put a
 team together of experts to make sure that we understood the nature of the
 allegations."

             That team of experts concluded that TRW's computer programs for
 the infrared sensors were "well designed and work properly" provided that
 the Pentagon does not have wrong information about what kind of warheads
and
 decoys an enemy is using.

             The reports that came out from that investigation concluded
 there was no merit to the allegations being made at the time.

             TRW also said it was cleared by a second review panel, but CBS
 News has been unable to obtain that report.

             Now TRW is no longer working on the infrared sensor project.
But
 Postol says the proof that the Pentagon has not solved this basic problem
is
 that it has had to change the way it uses balloon decoys in its tests.
"What
 they've done is remove the decoys that are most capable from the test
 series, substituted objects that are easily identified as decoys. And then
 they're going about creating what I consider to be a deception, that they
 can tell the difference between warheads and decoys," said Postol.

             The Pentagon has shifted its position in the Schwartz matter
and
 now says it is not closed, that there is an ongoing investigation of
defense
 contractor TRW. The General Accounting Office has also launched an
 investigation and interviewed witnesses. At the urging of more than 50
 congressmen, the FBI has begun a preliminary inquiry.

             But the missile defense program also has hundreds of supporters
 on Capitol Hill - none more outspoken than Congressman Curt Weldon, R-Pa.
 "If we don't build a new aircraft carrier, we have older ones. If we don't
 build a new fighter plane, we have older ones. If we don't build a new
tank,
 we have older ones. If we don't build missile defense, we have nothing,"
 said Weldon.

             Weldon responded to Postol's allegations that the anti-missile
 defense system will not work. "There are also Flat Earth Society people who
 also believed that the Earth was flat years ago, and there were scientists
 who made the case against John Kennedy that it was crazy, we'd never land
on
 the moon. And I characterize Ted Postol now as one of those people," said
 Weldon.

             But it isn't just Postol who holds this view. Fifty Nobel Prize
 winners signed a letter to the president calling the system ineffective and
 a grave danger to the nation's security.

             "Well, I don't know any of them that's come to Congress or to
 me," responded Weldon. "I've not seen one of their faces. I mean, you know,
 it's easy to get anyone to sign a letter. I sign letters all the time."

             Kadish conceded there is a lot of pressure for this project to
 succeed and much of that comes from politicians. "I have to say that this
is
 a very passionate subject for many years," said Kadish. "Certainly the
drive
 for missile defense has a political dimension to it. But that's our system.
 We have to decide as a country what it is we want for a defense."

             "There are a lot of ways to try to solve a missile defense
 program in particular that we need to try because it's unprecedented
 technology. Right now, from what I see, there's no reason to believe that
we
 can't make this work. But there's a lot more testing to be done. There's a
 lot more effort to be expended," he said.

             The next test is scheduled for the first half of next year.
 Critics say the missile defense system would violate a major arms treaty
 with Russia.

             Just last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that
 building the system would lead to a collapse of international security.


             Copyright 2000, CBS Worldwide Inc., All Rights Reserved



       Copyright 2000, CBS Worldwide Inc., All Rights Reserved.








-------------------------- eGroups Sponsor -------------------------~-~>
eGroups eLerts
It's Easy. It's Fun. Best of All, it's Free!
http://click.egroups.com/1/9698/0/_/_/_/978051043/
---------------------------------------------------------------------_->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]





Reply via email to