Congressional Record: February 28, 2002 (Extensions)
Page E242




                   CHINA'S LONG-RANGE MISSILE PROGRAM

                                 ______


                           HON. BOB SCHAFFER

                              of colorado

                    in the house of representatives

                      Thursday, February 28, 2002

  Mr. SCHAFFER. Mr. Speaker, on several occasions I have addressed this
House on the matter of National Security and the threat to it posed by
China's aggressive arms buildup. Particularly, with regard to China's
long-range missile program, America's vulnerability is growing, not
shrinking.
  While I applaud the leadership of our President to advance a national
missile defense program, Congress must rely upon complete, accurate,
and candid assessments of the threat posed by China, or any other
nation. Without such candid assessments, Americans are burdened by
excessive risk.
  I hereby submit for the Record, a letter I have today posted to Mr.
George Tenant, who heads America's Central Intelligence Agency. I urge
each of our colleagues to review this letter and respond to its
contents or reinforce its sentiments to the Director, and to the
President.
  Mr. Speaker, I respectfully submit the following for the Record.

       Dear Mr. Tenet: Last month, your agency produced the
     assessment of China's ballistic missile threat to the United
     States in the unclassified summary of the January 2002
     National Intelligence Estimate "Foreign Missile Developments
     and the Ballistic Missile Threat Through 2015." The lack of
     attention to the pronounced and growing danger caused by
     China's ballistic missile buildup, and its aggressive
     strategy for using its ballistic missiles cannot go
     unchallenged. The report is misleading, and, because it
     understates the magnitude of threat, is profoundly dangerous.
       Perhaps the unclassified National Intelligence Estimate was
     meant to conceal from foreign eyes what the CIA really thinks
     or knows. But this government has a duty to defend the lives
     and freedom of its citizens. A large part of that defense is
     informing the American people of the threats they face rather
     than downplaying, for example, China's ballistic missile and
     military buildup.
       In this regard, I protest the inferior quality and lack of
     information compared to Department of Defense reports such as
     the Soviet Military Power series initiated by Secretary of
     Defense Caspar Weinberger in the 1980's, which addressed the
     Soviet military threat in detail, providing numbers of
     missile, bombers, and warheads, and location of forces.
       Your report is an issue because China has focused on a
     buildup of ballistic missiles to defeat the United States. In
     addition to its ballistic missile and information warfare
     buildup, you yourself have noted the threat posed by China's
     growing anti-satellite capabilities. China is engaged in
     economic and surrogate terrorism, and diplomatic initiatives
     using its mouth to promise friendship while preparing for
     war. America needs to be informed and warned.
       Without adequate intelligence about the ballistic missile
     threat, or the courage to act on the intelligence it has, the
     United States will not be able to defend itself. President
     Bush's proposed defense budget understates the need to
     accelerate ballistic missile defense programs, and emphasizes
     a poor design for a ballistic missile defense using
     groundbased defenses over space-based defenses that can
     provide boost phase interception, global coverage, and
     multiple opportunities for interception.
       One point is how China's program for multiple reentry
     vehicles for its road-mobile ICBMs and SLBMs is
     "encountering significant technical hurdles and would be
     costly," giving an impression that China may not develop a
     MIRV capability, at least in the near future.
       In contrast, in 1999 defense analyst Richard D. Fisher,
     Jr., could convincingly write, "Both the DF-31 and DF-41
     ICBMs are expected to incorporate multiple independently
     targeted reentry vehicle (MIRV) warheads." Fisher further
     noted China has been suspected of trying to develop MIRVs for
     years, and that in 1998 Air force General Eugene Harbinger
     said China is developing MIRVs for its ICBMs. One would
     suspect that China would have made some progress since
     Fisher's analysis in 1999, especially given technological
     assistance from the United States and Russia. In January 2002
     Fisher noted the CIA report appeared to be too low in its
     estimates of China's threat.
       On the issue of MIRVs, the report appears to understate how
     China's spy and intelligence gathering program, highlighted
     by the 1999 Congressional Cox Committee report, was focused
     on obtaining information on U.S. nuclear warheads and
     ballistic missile technology, which makes extensive use of
     MIRVs. In addition to U.S. missile, nuclear warhead, and
     satellite technology that could be used for MIRVs, China has
     obtained considerable technological help from Russia. China
     is one of Russia's largest arms customers and has signed a
     strategic partnership with it. Russia has perfected the
     technology for multiple warheads in its advanced rail and
     road-mobile ICBMs--the SS-24 and SS-27 Topol-M, and
     reportedly transferred to China SS-18 technology that would
     presumably include MIRV technology as the SS-18 was designed
     to carry 10 nuclear warheads, and could be fitted with even
     more.
       Of surprise is the CIA statement that "China could begin
     deploying the DF-31 ICBM during the first half of the
     decade." In contrast to the uncertainties contained in the
     CIA report, in May 2001 Taipei Times defense reporter Brian
     Hsu noted China has built two bases for housing the DF-31 and
     plans to build more. It would be very reasonable to assume
     that these bases house DF-31s. In addition, according to a
     story by Washington Times reporter Bill Gertz, China was
     expected to obtain an operational capability for the DF-31 by
     the end of 2001, before the release of the CIA report.
       If China's deployment of the DF-31 ICBM follows its pattern
     of deploying short-range road-mobile ballistic missiles over
     a number of bases as it has done with its ballistic missile
     buildup aimed at Taiwan, the United States should expect
     China to deploy the DF-31 over more than two bases to blunt
     the effect of any potential counterattacks or preemptive
     strikes.
       The CIA report, rather than telling the American people how
     China is taking steps to deploy the DF-31 and apparently has
     achieved an operational capability, is content to word its
     analysis as a possibility. In addition, it overlooks why
     China is building the DF-31--its ballistic missile strategy.
       The Taipei Times noted that China's buildup of the DF-31 is
     part of its "Long Wall Project" that "is aimed at the US,
     not Taiwan," and said that "The Chinese military leadership
     plans to put longer-range ballistic missiles in the
     southeastern provinces so that they can cover US military
     targets in the Pacific."
       The CIA report, moreover, appears remiss with respect to
     China's buildup of intermediate-range ballistic missiles such
     as the DF-21-X and DF-25, which can attack U.S. forces and
     bases in the Far East and Pacific. The report also projects
     that by 2005 China will have a force of short-range ballistic
     missiles that will number "several hundred missiles." Yet,
     throughout 2000 and 2001 China was reported as having massed
     300-350 short-range ballistic missiles against Taiwan in a
     number of news accounts, and increased production to more
     than 50 per year. China already has an arsenal exceeding
     "several hundred missiles."
       China's view on using its long-range ballistic missiles is
     very aggressive. It does not believe in a "balance of
     power" dictated by equal numbers of missiles or nuclear
     warheads. Rather, according to one Chinese analyst, China
     believes that "It is not necessary for China to seek a
     nuclear balance with the US. If we have the capacity to
     launch a nuclear counterattack, there will be no difference
     between 10 and 10,000 nuclear warheads." This same view
     appeared in an August 1999 planning document of China's
     Central Military Commission headed by President Jiang Zemin.
       In May 2000, the late Congressman Floyd Spence, quoting the
     Liberation Army Daily, noted that China "is a country that
     has certain abilities of launching a strategic counterattack
     and the capacity of launching a long-distance strike . . .
     It is not a wise move to be at war with a country such as
     China, a point which the U.S. policymakers know fairly well
     also." In 1995 PLA General Xiong Guangkai issued a similar
     threat.
       China has used its ballistic missiles to intimidate, seen
     in its launch of ballistic missiles off Taiwan in 1995 and
     1996. While the diplomatic failure which occurred resulted in
     the tempering of its diplomacy, the fact that China has
     changed its diplomatic tactics toward Taiwan and the United
     States should not obscure its strategy for using its
     ballistic missiles for aggression. China's words of
     friendship are a mask for its ballistic missile and military
     buildup.
       American should be concerned with its defense. The
     terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 showed what can
     happen with a lack of vigilance. The United States needs to
     realize that China is engaged in a military and ballistic
     missile buildup pointed at Americans. We must take the
     necessary steps to defend our citizens, and we should build a
     space-based ballistic missile defense. We must have better
     information about China's ballistic missile threat.
     Regrettably, your report on this matter is insufficient.
           Very truly yours,
     Bob Schaffer,
         Member of Congress from Colorado.


                          ____________________