U.S. TO BUILD MISSILE DEFENSE BUT STILL WANTS ARMS CONTROLS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP70B00338R000300100093-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 19, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 12, 2006
• Sequence Number: 93
• Publication Date: September 19, 1967
• Content Type: NSPR

Approved For Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300100093-2
U.S. to BuiIdM1isiIe Defense
But Sti I IWantsArmsContrals
By BERNARD GWERTZMAN
Star Staff Writer
Secretary of Defense Robert S
McNamara says the U.S. wilt
build a $5 billion defense against
future Red Chinese missile at-
tack but 'argues that this in no
way makes less urgent the need
for an arms control agreement
with Russia.
Nearly] three-fourths of Mc-
Namara's major speech last
night was devoted, in fact, to a
discussion of the U.S.-Soviet nu-
clear balance, and the fact that
both Russia and the United
States "can mutually destroy
one another."
He appealed to Russia to
agree to the U.S. proposal for
talks on limiting the size of mis-
sile and bomber arsenals,isince
both countries already have sur-
3lus weapons and are on the
3rink of what he called a "fool-
sh and' feckless" new arms
,ace.
The Reaction
McNamara told a meeting of
Jnited Press International edi-
)rs 'and publishers in San Fran-
isco that the United States
7ould begin production by the
nd of this year of the '$5 billion
nti-ballistic missile (ABM) sys-
3m to defend against possi-
de attack from Red China in the
aid-1970s.
,Because China has such a ru-
limentary nuclear arsenal, this
`thin" ABM system would have
i relatively high degree of re-
Partial Text of McNamara's Speech
on the ABM. Page A-4
liability in case of attack, Mc-
Namara said.
Congressional reaction was
generally favorable, although
some military-minded legisla-
tors criticized the delay in going
ahead with the "thin system."
Sen., Clinton P. Anderson,
chairman of the Joint Atomic
Energy subcommittee on securi-
ty, saiu "the decision to proceed
with the production and eventual
deployment of an ABM system
was required to insure our na-
tional security particularly in
light of the Communist China
nuclear threat."
Chairman L. Mendel Rivers,
D-S.C., of. the House Armed
Services Committee, said "I
hope it is not too late," noting
that McNamara had "finally"
come around to what military
leaders and Congress had been
urging fqr two years.
To Guard All U.S. Cities
But on the other side, Sen. J.
William F u l b r i g h t, D-Ark.,
chairman of the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee, said the deci-
sion represented a "very serious
failure of diplomacy, and pred-
icted the "thin system" would
"be thick before long."
Pentagon sources said the
Nike-X defei}se system is de-
signed to protect all US. cities
and most missile sites. Accord-
ing to estimates, China by the
mid-1970s will have ?10 to 50 rudi-
mentary intercontinental ballis-
tic missiles. '?
If the i,Tnited States had no
defense, these Chinese missiles
could kill between 5 and 10 mil-
lion Americans, but with the
ABM, losses could be cut to less
than a million, sources said.
The- Russians have such a
3owerful nuclear force, howev-
;r, that no. contemplated ABM
system could prevent the death
c Ameri-
~4 fals
:Ii1lS:is~_ ar,,
give protection in case of acci-'
dental attack by a few missiles
-and will give some additional
security to the underground U.S.
offensive missiles, the Minute-
men.
The ABM system now planned
involves two types of defensive'
missiles and two types of radar.
The mainstay is the Spartan
missile which would intercept in-
coming nuclear warheads a few
hundred miles away -w h e n
they're still in the stratosphere.
It would be guided by a special
perimeter aquisition radar.
Any missiles that got through
would be challenged in the at-
mosphere-less than 25 miles
from target-by the Sprint mis-
sile, which is guided by missile
sight radar.
The Spartan is chiefly respon-
sible for protecting populated
areas, and the Sprint for guard-
ing missile sites.
A Slow Decision
Neither of these missiles has
been tested in intercept at-
tempts, but ? both will undergo
such tests at Kwajalein Atoll in
the Pacific. Sprint recently was
given preliminary test firings at
White Sands Missile Range;
N.M.
The funds for the first year of
the "thin system" production al-
ready have been allocated. Pen-
tagon sources say that about
See MISSILES, Page A-6
Approved For Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300100093-2
 Approved For Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300100093-2
ari& 61 the security scale that
we are now," he said.
It-as was essentially the same
argument McNamara used at
Glassboro, N.J., when President
Johnson asked him to explain
the U.S. view on the need for
talks. But Soviet.Premier Alexel
N. Kosygin apparently showed
no interest in this rather sophis-
ticated argument, and merely
said that Russia sees nothing
provocative in building its ABM
system,
McNamara acknowledged that
the decision to go ahead with the
"thin system" would produce
"strong Pressure" to expand the
system into a Soviet-orientated
one.
But he said "we must resist
that temptation firmly . . . be-
cause our greatest deterrent
against a Soviet strike is not a
massive, costly, but highly pen-
etrable ABM shield, but rather
a fully credible offensive."
could fall behind. The Joint
Chiefs also favor matching the
Soviet deployment.
The decision to go ahead with
he $5 billion system was made
somewhat reluctantly by the ad-
ministration after nearly a year
Of trying to get the Russians
interested in talks on a general
freeze of all missiles.
Although the "thin system" is
not designed to have any appre-
ciable relation to U.S.-Soviet
military balance, it was thought
here that it would be easier to
interest the Russians in talks
before there was any deploy-
ment of the U.S. ABM.
Historically defense-minded
Russia has begun building of a
small-scale ABM system of its
own around Moscow, and is in
the midst of constructing a na-
tion-wide net that may be a larg-
er ABM system.
The deployment of Soviet
ABMs led to strong concern in
Congress that the United States
$360 million wiif" proba iiy ,,,e
spent in the remainder of this
?iscal year.
y 'a loe some porn orbal-
A proposed "heavy ABM
shield" would cost about $40 bil-
lion, McNamara said, but would
not buy "a significant improve-
ment in our security."
He said that rather than spend
money on a big ABM, the ad-
ministration would simply im-
pprove and expand its offensive
missile force.
"Every ABM system that is
now feasible involves- firing de-
fensive missiles at incoming of-
fensive warheads in an effort to
destroy them," McNamara said.
"But what many commenta-
tors on this issue overlook is
that any such system can rather
obviously be defeated by an ene-
my simply sending more offen-
sive warheads, or dummy war-
heads, than there are defensive
missiles capable of disposing of
them.
"Were we to deploy a heavy
ABM system throughout the
United States, the Soviets would
clearly be strongly motivated to
so increase their offensive capa-
bility as to cancel out our defen-
sive advantage.
Sees Futility
"It is futile for each of us to
spend $4 billion, $40 billion, or
Approved For Release 2006/01/30 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000300100093-2