NORAD at turning point in mission

0 Comments | Gazette, The (Colorado Springs), Mar 28, 2005 | by PAM ZUBECK THE GAZETTE

Canada wants to opt out of NORAD's Star Wars mission, which could foreshadow changes in the way the United States fights the war against terrorism.

The two nations are negotiating the first post-Sept. 11 agreement for operation of the North American Aerospace Defense Command, based at Peterson Air Force Base.

The United States wants NORAD to add monitoring of maritime and land threats to its 47-year-old mission of watching the skies and space. The U.S. also wants to add a system to shoot down enemy missiles.

Canada's decision to opt out of the missile defense system could be a sign that other areas of cooperation are in jeopardy, some experts fear.

"In the upcoming negotiations, NORAD grows or dies. Those are its two options," said Brett Lambert, a national security expert with defense contractor DFI International in Washington, D.C. "If NORAD doesn't respond to meet the post-9/11 challenges to add sea first and then land, the concept of NORAD will begin to wither on the vine. That would be a tremendous loss to both countries."

Although the United States would continue the NORAD mission, "We need Canadian cooperation to protect our own borders," Lambert said. "Hopefully this is a bump in the road and not a dead end."

The importance of Canada's role in the war against terrorism was underscored when the Department of Homeland Security announced a terrorism exercise next month involving top officials from Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom.

"Our partnerships with the United Kingdom and Canada will further enhance our ability to deal with terrorism on an international level," Secretary of Homeland Security Michael Chertoff said in a statement.

Until Sept. 11, 2001, when hijackers flew airliners into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, NORAD focused on Cold War foes.

After the hijackings drew a confused and ill-prepared response, NORAD's mission was expanded to troll for space and air threats from within North America.

It recently added early warning and tracking capabilities for the U.S.-based missile defense system under development, and last August, Canada approved sharing that information with U.S. Northern Command.

The nation's homeland defense command, NorthCom, also is based at Peterson and will run the system that's planned to have 40 rockets in Alaska, California and at sea poised to intercept attacking missiles.

Canada has refused further involvement, which might have included putting parts of the missile system on Canadian soil.

Tests in which a rocket was to shoot down mock intercontinental ballistic missiles have failed three of eight times since 1999; two tests, in December and February, weren't completed after the interceptor didn't launch.

Canada was skeptical of missile defense during the Star Wars days of the 1980s, but a year ago it appeared poised to cooperate. However, Prime Minister Paul Martin announced Feb. 24 that his country would not take part and instead would focus on border, coastline and Arctic security.

The United States remains optimistic about missile defense.

"We believe this system will work," Air Force Lt. Gen. Trey Obering, Missile Defense Agency director, said in a March 9 news briefing. "We're not just chasing our tail. We have enough confidence to continue to move foward."

If the cause of problems with the February test is identified and fixed, the next test could happen in April, he said.

President Bush spoke with Martin this month and "underscored the importance of redoubling our security cooperation efforts," the White House said.

Nevertheless, Canada's recent decision might cast a shadow on the NORAD pact negotiations.

Baker Spring, a defense analyst at Washington, D.C., think tank The Heritage Foundation, said missile defense will advance despite Canada's cold feet. So will NORAD, though it may not be the vehicle for maritime and land security cooperation, he said.

"Do you want an organizational structure that's identical in all three deals? Or do you have something that's more custom-made for maritime and land?" he said.

In any event, Spring doubts that Canada's decision, based on most Canadians' view that missile defense will foster the weaponization of space, is permanent.

That's why it's important to keep the door open for a change of heart, recently retired NORAD and Northern Command leader Gen. Ralph "Ed" Eberhart said.

"I think we'd be shortsighted if we said, 'You said "no," so it's "no" forever,'" he said in an interview last week.

"I hope (Canada) doesn't say, 'OK, since we're not doing this, all bets are off.' If you left it up to me, we need to cooperate in terms of air defense," Eberhart said. "If we elect not to cooperate in terms of active missile defense, meaning intercepting an incoming missile, I still think we ought to cooperate passively by letting them have missile warning. We need to be very careful before we walk away from this relationship and understand what the ramifications are."

Michael O'Hanlon, with the Brookings Institution, a nonpartisan Washington, D.C., think tank, is confident NORAD will be preserved.