Foreign Relations of the United States, 1981–1988, Volume XLIV, Part 1, National Security Policy, 1985–1988

269. Memorandum From the Vice President’s Assistant for National Security Affairs (Gregg) and the Vice President’s Military Assistant (Mattke) to Vice President Bush¹

Washington, July 26, 1988

SUBJECT

• SDI, Update following Dr. Teller’s Presentation

BACKGROUND. Today the CARDINAL IN THE KREMLIN, a powerful pro-SDI novel by Tom Clancy was released, just as you heard Dr. Teller brief the President on “Brilliant Pebbles,” a recent development by Livermore Labs. I believe the coincidence is fortuitous. Clancy’s novel will stimulate conversation and support for Strategic Defense just as word of another triumph of American technology begins to circulate.²

As you heard, Livermore’s concept calls for deployment in low earth orbit of thousands, tens of thousands, of small, inexpensive, self-contained kinetic kill vehicles. Utilizing micro-miniaturized components (many of which came from Japan), these tiny rockets will detect, track, intercept and kill warheads early in their trajectory.³ The scheme is quite ingenious, relatively low cost and probably feasible with near-current technology.

However several problems remain, including how to prevent the “brilliant pebbles” from taking on every rocket launch, including the shuttle, our military missions or commercial rockets. Also, despite Dr. Teller’s enthusiasm, the Livermore concept is not THE answer. It is a competitor with the “smart rock” approach of the more sophisticated, more expensive KKV program.⁴ (General Abrahamson intends to encourage both approaches, believing competition will stimulate further progress and reduce costs of each.)⁵

Nevertheless, the concept and development is exciting—and very important to you and your plans for SDI. It represents just one of several promising technologies emerging from the concept and laboratory stages into the full development and demonstration phase.⁶ Moreover, this development effectively belies the adverse propaganda and apparent confusion currently swirling around SDI.⁷

Finally, the development highlights the importance of sustaining your commitment to a “comprehensive”, i.e. layered, ground and space based system. Fierce ideological opposition remains. The current move by Aspin to “gut” the Space Based Interceptor in the Authorization Bill (cutting SBI from $250M to $75M) is neither a measure of SDI’s potential or progress, rather it is a direct assault on the premise of strategic defense per se.

CURRENT STATUS. Despite widespread speculation in the press, SDI is not in disarray. Technological advances are proliferating not stagnating. The most recent Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) study initiated by Secretary Carlucci recommended, again, a “phased deployment” of elements, incrementally leading to a layered, comprehensive system. Unfortunately, the preliminary report was leaked, emerged piecemeal and misinterpreted.

Since that time, the Press has assumed the Administration will back away from space-based components and settle for ground defenses. The Defense Secretary is looking for political consensus, but finding little. As you heard from General Welch, the Services have other priorities. Damning a “Phase I” system with faint praise is a clear message. The Joint Chiefs are more immediately concerned about their Service Budgets than near term (this century) Strategic Defense.

Mr. Vice President, it remains for you to define the future of SDI. Everyone is looking for guidance. Dukakis is adamantly opposed to the concept and cannot backtrack, not even to Nunn’s January 16th idea of Accidental Launch Protection (ALPS). You have the opportunity to clearly delineate the difference—you will defend America, he will not.

You can move forward from your current position by

• Committing to deployment of a Strategic Defense System,
• but defer definition of the architecture, (the specific ground and space based components) to 1991–92, when research, development and demonstration will provide you adequate information to make the right choice.

Especially after today’s presentation, you can make such a pledge with confidence in American technology. Such a declaration would galvanize the conservative, pro-defense element of the country. Yet, unlike the Kemp “deploy now” suggestion, it would not undercut the research and development required to field space-based and advanced defenses.

1. Source: George H.W. Bush Library, Bush Vice Presidential Records, Office of National Security Affairs, Don Gregg Files, Subject File, OA/ID 19862–014, SDI (Strategic Defense Initiative) [1]. Secret. Bush wrote at the top of the memorandum: “good paper—GB.”
2. Bush wrote a checkmark in the left-hand margin beside this paragraph.
3. Bush wrote checkmarks beside “orbit” in the first sentence and “warheads” in the second sentence of this paragraph.
4. Bush wrote a checkmark above “program.”
5. Bush wrote a checkmark above “reduce.”
6. Bush wrote a checkmark beside “one.”
7. Not found. Bush wrote a checkmark above “confusion.”