Defense Secretary May 1 Remarks on Missile Defense
Presenter: Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld
Tuesday, May 1, 2001 - 1:00 p.m. EDT
Secretary of Defense Media Availability with Australia's Minister of
Defense
(Media availability with Australian Defense Minister Peter Reith
following their meeting at the Pentagon)
Rumsfeld: We just had a very good meeting and a good lunch and a nice
visit about a range of issues and aspects of the very sound and
healthy relationship between the United States and Australia.
I'll turn it over to you.
Reith: Thank you very much, Secretary.
We've had discussions on a broad range of matters, obviously talking
about the Asia Pacific region. I've expressed the Australian
government's - the interest that we have, the shared interest in
developments in the region and the importance of the emphasis that the
new Bush administration is giving to matters affecting the Asia
Pacific. We have, of course, reaffirmed the importance of the alliance
arrangements, which are important to both of us. And I've also
accepted a very kind offer from the secretary for a briefing for me
and my party in the next 24 hours whilst I'm here in Washington on
missile defense.
So it's been a good lunch, and we've appreciated the opportunity to
talk.
Q: Secretary Rumsfeld, there's been a lot of grumbling around the
building by some of the senior military leadership that their input
hasn't been included in these various strategic reviews you have going
on. Are you intentionally cutting out the uniformed military? What's
your message to them?
Rumsfeld: The military at all levels have been involved in this
process throughout the process. And when the studies are completed, it
will be put into the - they will be put into the QDR, at which point
it will be again engaged through the military at all levels. And
there's no question but that with a big department, that not
everybody's involved in everything that goes on.
But the CINCs and chiefs have had repeated opportunities to
participate, as has the joint staff.
Yes.
Q: Mr. Secretary, on missile defense, does the administration
contemplate major - major - cuts, unilateral cuts in warheads beyond
even the 2,500 contemplated under START III?
Rumsfeld: The President has said, and will say again today, that he
believes that - correctly - that the United States is going to be
able to reduce the numbers of warheads, and he has not concluded
specific numbers, nor have I. We are in the process of studying that
and have been working with StratCom and other elements in the
department. And we'll be making some recommendations to them in due
course.
Q: Do you contemplate that the cuts perhaps would go beyond the 2,500
contemplated in --
Rumsfeld: I don't contemplate numbers until I screw my head into it
and think what I think, and then make my recommendations to the
president.
Q: On missile defense, Mr. Secretary, is the administration hopeful,
Mr. Secretary, is the administration hopeful that it could have an
initial missile defense system as early as 2004? Is that a prospect?
Rumsfeld: I am not going to be putting time tables on that. We will
have extensive briefings and consultations with our allies around the
world and with Australia over the coming weeks and months and explain
what our thinking is and hear their views before coming to a final
conclusion. We'll be doing extensive briefings on Capitol Hill with
those many members there who are interested in missile defense. And
what will evolve from that will be after those consultations are
complete and the discussions with Congress are complete.
(Cross talk.)
Q: Given that the President this afternoon is going to make a major
speech reaffirming the government's intentions of going forward, what
is Australia's official position on missile defense now, and what is
the role that - (word inaudible) - may play?
Reith: Well, I think you should wait till the President's made his
remarks, and I'll be happy to answer that question later on this week.
But I do appreciate the fact that we've had a discussion about it
today, and we're going to have a more intense briefing, at the
Secretary's invitation, in the next 24 hours.
Thank you very much.
Q: (Off mike) - at this point into Australia's position on missile
defense or on the ABM Treaty?
Reith: Well, in terms of missile defense, the foreign minister has
made a number of comments about it. Our position is quite well known.
And, obviously, we'll be very interested to read the comments this
afternoon.
Thank you very much.
Q: Secretary, does Australia have a role in the American vision of a
missile defense system? And would there be a problem if Australia was
not willing to participate in development of that system?
Rumsfeld: As I think most people are aware, the United States has
indicated a conviction that the proliferation that exists in the world
is pervasive, that increasing numbers of countries are finding their
way to having ballistic missiles and weapons of mass destruction, and
that it is in our interest as a country to work with our friends and
allies around the world to see that we develop defenses against these
limited capabilities that are existing and will exist to a greater
extent in the period ahead. That means we'll be working with our
friends and allies. And certainly Australia is a country that is a
friend and an ally and --
Q: Mr. Secretary, one more on missile defense. Can we just get a
clarification? Some of the critics of what the president is about to
say are calling what you are developing a "scarecrow" defense because
some of your supporters are saying it's not necessary for it to be 100
percent effective; in other words, you put something out there, you
deter an enemy from attacking, yet they say it is more like just
putting a scarecrow out in the field in terms of the effect.
Rumsfeld: Well, anyone who thinks about history understands that
deterrence and dissuasion is an important aspect of modern life. We
know that it is - the first choice is not to prevail in a conflict,
the first choice is to be arranged in a way that you can dissuade
somebody from engaging in hostile acts, and therefore you've deterred
a conflict from occurring.
Anything that a Department of Defense does ought to look at that
deterrent aspect. So I don't discount that. There are people whose
behavior can be altered if they're persuaded that it's not in their
interest to do something.
Now, second, anyone who's ever been involved with research and
development activities knows that it is highly unlikely that in the
first try someone will develop something that is perfect. It's not
true in pharmaceutical research and development, with any kinds of
therapy. It's certainly not true in defense. The Corona, for example,
failed something like 11 times. Most systems are imperfect; that is to
say, for every offense, there's a defense, and vice versa.
But what we're talking about here is a new set of capabilities to be
sure to dissuade or deter, as you put it, as well as to defend against
a growing threat in the world. And it - they need not be 100 percent
perfect, in my opinion, and they are certainly unlikely to be in their
early stages of evolution.
And anyone who believes that you can have a full-blown, perfect system
from the beginning, I think, is underestimating the difficulties of
doing that in anything that's technologically complex.
Q: Will it have an effect on future adversaries even if it's not good,
even if it doesn't --
Rumsfeld: There's no question.
Q: Mr. Secretary --
Q: Mr. Secretary, do you plan to try to --
Rumsfeld: Ask the minister a question!
Reith: They've moved on to you, I'm afraid, Mr. Secretary.
Q: Do you plan to quickly try to add sea- and space-based weaponry to
the ground-based system envisioned by the Clinton administration?
Rumsfeld: There's no question but that if one is looking to develop a
capability to defend against a threat, that having the freedom to look
at a variety of ways of doing that defense is preferable. It's
preferable technologically. It's preferable from a cost effectiveness
standpoint.
I will leave this group to you.
Reith: Yes, thank you very much.
Q: Minister Reith?
Reith: Yes?
Q: A basic question, if you can step back on the microphones for a
second.
Q: Just for a second.
Q: Minister Reith?
Reith: Yeah? No, I'm talking to you on Thursday, so --
Q: It's just on the - (inaudible) --
(Cross talk.)
Reith: I need to say goodbye to the secretary first. Give me five
minutes.