Obama Administration Blocks Critical Radar Test

The Washington Times is reporting the Obama administration denied military requests to use our most powerful sea-based radar to monitor North Korea's recent missile launch, thereby, blocking the opportunity to gain valuable data to refine America's missile defense system -- before it's needed during an actual attack on a major U.S. city.

April 15, 2009

U.S. failed to use best radar for N. Korea missile

Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates denied permission for the U.S. Northern Command to use the Pentagon's most powerful sea-based radar to monitor North Korea's recent missile launch, precluding officials from collecting finely detailed launch data or testing the radar in a real-time crisis, current and former defense officials said.

SBX, deployed in 2005, can track and identify warheads, decoys and debris in space with very high precision. Officials said the radar is so powerful it could detect a baseball hit out of a ballpark from more than 3,000 miles away, and that other radars used by the U.S. would not be able to provide the same level of detail about North Korea's missile capabilities.

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. Henry Obering, who until recently headed the Missile Defense Agency, said the SBX would have gathered data other U.S. systems could not.

Former defense officials said the failure to use the SBX precluded the U.S. from gathering finely detailed intelligence and electronic signatures on the North Korean missile - information that could be useful in guarding against a future rocket launch aimed at the United States or one its allies.

Regardless of whether it was a missile or space launcher, "the technologies that overlap between a ballistic missile and a space launcher are incredible; everything you need for a ballistic missile can be tested out with a space launcher," one of the former defense officials said, speaking only on the condition of anonymity because the information he possesses about the SBX's capabilities is not public.

Obama administration officials offered various "reasons" for denying the military's request to use the $900 million SBX radar, ranging from other radars and sensors could support the operational requirements, to it would have caused a temporary delay in maintenance, to concerns about "provoking" the North Korea. The most likely reason for denying the military's request to test this critical radar was Obama's misguided concerns about not "provoking" North Korea.

One current and two former specialists in strategic defenses said the administration rejected the request because it feared that moving the huge floating radar system would be viewed by North Korea as provocative and upset diplomatic efforts aimed at restarting six-nation nuclear talks.

A week or two delay in maintenance would be a small, logical, and reasonable price to pay for the valuable information we would have gained from using the radar to monitor Korea's live missile launch. As for "provoking" the North Koreans, how is monitoring the launch of the missile test they already had planned and announced going to "provoke" them; although, I'm sure Obama's information spinners and "media managers" will have a "plausible" answer for those willing to fall for their propaganda?

And what did the naive Obama administration get for not "provoking" North Korea, while giving up a unique opportunity to gather data and information that could prove critical in refining our missile defense system? They got more "talk" and resolutions from the U.N. -- most of whose members couldn't care less if America were struck with a nuclear missile! And to make it even worse, the Obama administration managed to get the North Koreans to restart their nuclear program and have the U.N. inspectors and monitors kicked out of the country besides!

Reacting to U.N. condemnation of the April 4 launch, North Korea said Tuesday that it would "never participate in the [nuclear] talks" and would restart its plutonium-yielding nuclear reactor. The U.N. nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), said North Korea had ordered U.N. inspectors to leave the reclusive communist country.

Not only did the Obama administration refuse requests to further test our nation's missile defense system, but they've begun cutting funding for the very system that could protect America's cities from a rogue or limited nuclear missile attack, the death toll and results of which would make 9/11 seem insignificant by comparison.

The administration's restrictions on missile defenses were disclosed as Mr. Gates announced last week that he is planning a $1.4 billion cut in missile defense funding.

Sen. Jon Kyl, Arizona Republican, and Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent, wrote to Mr. Obama on April 6, urging him to reject the missile defense cuts.

The senators warned that the planned missile defense funding cut would undermine international cooperation with Japan, Israel and other states at a time when missile threats are growing.

One has to wonder what Gates gave up, and what promises and concessions he made in order to keep his job as Secretary of Defense under Obama's "weak on defense" administration.

Will it be Secretary Gates's job to oversee and manage the weakening and dismantling of the U.S. military and the defenses of the world's last remaining superpower -- a goal many of Obama's Liberal supporters clearly want to see happen!

AAR