'THIN' ANTIMISSILE DEFENSE SEEN

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP70B00338R000300090032-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 1
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 9, 2006
• Sequence Number: 32
• Content Type: NSPR

`j'V'4&';(1 C-(/ iL
AN;vi
lii!>'Fo1 Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300090032-1
WASHINGTON CLOSE-UP
'Thin' Antimissile Defense Seen
The best solution to the U.S.
agonizing antimissile problem
is almost certainly a "thin
defense"-one that is effective
against small attacks but
conspicuously inadequate
against a massive Russian
attack.
This approach is being
studied carefully in the Penta-
gon. So far the analyses fail to
find anything particularly
wrong with it.
This is in marked contrast
to the studies on a "full"
defense against enemy mis-
siles. Secretary of Defense
Robert S. McNamara has
publicized calculations show-
ing that the Russians can
overcome a U.S. defense-by
improving and enlarging its
offensive force-no matter
what this country spends on
Nike-X, the proposed missile
interceptor.
The McNamara case against
an effort at a full defense is
getting a sympathetic hearing
from some key members of
Congress who used to support
the Nike-X.
But there has been no real
public examination of another
form of the Nike-X, built for a
different purpose. This, the
thin defense, looks like a
winner today.
There are two basic ap-
proaches to defense against
missiles. The one debated
thoroughly in the past would
try to defend American cities
and military installations
against an all-out Russian
attack.
It would intercept and
destroy the warheads of
enemy ICBMs before they had
a chance to explode on their
targets. Tests of the Nike-X on
Kwajalein island indicate that
it would work well against a
simple attack by simple
warheads but that it would fail
By RICHARD FRYKLUND
carrying showers of warheads
and decoy devices.
So McNamara has, in effect,
rejected Nike-X as inadequate
at any price.
What's more, the President
wants an agreement with the
Soviet Union for a mutual ban
on antimissile weapons. The
President's argument is that
both sides will avoid the waste
of $40 billion to $100 billion on
new defenses and improved
offenses.
The thin defense looks to a
different problem.. It would
defend against attacks from
other countries-Red China or
any country that cared to
build a cheap and simple
offense.
It's as sure as anything in
the defense business that for
$3.4 billion the United States
can build a small Nike-X
defense that will stop a small
attack almost cold.
Some studies say that under
many circumstances of war
with a smaller country, the
United States would suffer no
casualties. In other war
situations, the death toll would
be in the hundreds of thou-
sands-as contrasted with the
100 million who would die in
an all-out Russian attack
today.
The thin Nike-X would use
the same missiles, radars and
computers but use fewer of
them. Every city and town
would be defended.
A number of distinct advan-
tages would flow from instal-
lation of the thin Nike-X.
Millions of lives would be
saved in an attack by some
irrational or reckless small
country.
Blackmail threats by such a
country could be ignored.
Accidental discharge of a
few missiles-even by the
Soviet Union - could be ban-
urge to reply with a counter-
launch of missiles.
And the United States and
the Soviet Union could return,
for all practical purposes, to
the good old days when only
two countries in the world had
nuclear weapons.
Those days seemed grim at
the time, but in retrospect,
they were rather safe simply
because the two governments
realized the danger of the use
of nuclear weapons and be-
cause neither had any inten-
tion of striking first.
If both the United States and
the Soviet Union install thin
defenses-and the Soviet
Union already has started
some kind of defense-then
neither would be in an arms
race with the other, both
would be defended against
third countries, and each
would have a comfortable,
mutually deterred relationship
with the other.
The Russians would realize
that our defense was not
designed to handle their re-
taliatory attacks against us,
and of course a thin Russian
defense would be no obstacle
to U.S. retaliation against the
Soviet Union. Neither side
would have to improve its
offense against the other.
The $3.4 billion Nike-X
would defend even against the
Red Chinese until 1980 or
beyond, according to Pentagon
estimates. The money would
be spent over several years.
For another half-billion a
year, the system could be
maintained and-improved and
could remain effective until
1990.
After that, in theory, other
countries could acquire the
offensive skill necessary to get
back in the contest.
But, meanwhile, a few
billion dollars could buy a lot
of peace of mind for Ameri-
cans.
against an attack by rockets
wlth0it,great death.and
ruction 4pd without. the
Approved For Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300090032-1