In a message dated 7/2/2004 2:18:04 PM Eastern Daylight Time, Robert.Paul@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx writes: Is this is meant to be evidence supporting Eric's initial claim, the claim that several of us questioned? The subtext here is that Clinton sold MIRV technology? http://www.hciottawa.ca/news/misc/980819-2.html Extracts from the speech made by Mr. Benjamin Gilman, Chairman of the US House International Relations Committee, on July 28, 1998 .. In addition to China's mischief, there are distressing reports on how US assistance to communist China may have helped Beijing develop MIRV (multiple individual reentry vehicle) technology. .... _____ http://www.softwar.net/missile.html Launches 1996-7 and 1998 (successful) Motorola Iridium (Lockheed) Specific Technology Transferred Validated Chinese upper stage separation technology, vibrational and load coupling analysis, attitude control, and payload mounting. Two Motorola communication satellites were to be delivered with a kick motor and new satellite dispenser of Chinese design. To assure successful launch, the contractor demanded that the Chinese prove that the Chinese systems would work properly and do the job. Concerns included the properly timed release of the satellites, the mounting of the satellites in the delivery bus (would the two satellites break from their moorings due to improper vibrational and load coupling analysis), would the delivery bus's attitude control be destabilized by the release of the fast satellite, and would the kick motor generate too little or too much thrust at the wrong time. Military Significance Helped China master the technology needed to develop its own multiple independently targetable re, entry vehicles for the new solid rocket intercontinental ballistic missile it is trying to drive from SS-25 missile technology with the Russians. SOURCE: Beyond The Loral-Hughes Controversy: A Decade of US Satellite Transfers And Their Military Significance, by Henry Sokolski, Executive Director, The Nonproliferation Policy Education Center, 1-202-466-4406 _____ And finally http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/WF980715/epf304.htm Note that Bacon says that Motorola only provided "information." And disputes the required accuracy of the MIRV, even though that has subsequently been shown not to be the case. -EY _____ TRANSCRIPT: PENTAGON REGULAR BRIEFING, JULY 14, 1998 (China, Japan, Kosovo, Yeltsin, Cyprus, Pakistan, Israel) (5340) Pentagon Spokesman Kenneth Bacon briefed. Following is the Defense Department transcript: (begin transcript) DoD News Briefing Tuesday, July 14, 1998 -- [Bacon:] The Chinese have developed a satellite dispenser system as the article pointed out. Motorola used that satellite dispenser system to launch more than one satellite simultaneously. What Motorola did was simply provide information that was necessary to attach its satellites to the dispenser system that the Chinese already had developed. Launching more than one satellite at a time is not particularly complex technology. It does not require the same degree of accuracy to launch satellites into an orbit as it does to launch multiple warheads into orbits. Whether they are MIRVs which are independently targetable warheads, or whether they're multiple reentry vehicles. The recent talk has been about MIRVs which require a much greater degree of accuracy in terms of being placed precisely into an orbit, than it would require to put a satellite into an orbit. So what Motorola did was provide, after government review, technology that allowed -- it didn't provide technology, it provided information that allowed them to attach satellites to a dispenser they'd already designed. They didn't design this with Motorola's help. Q: So the dispenser was, as far as you know, was indigenous Chinese technology... A: That is my understanding, that they already had the dispenser. Q: The Washington Times article quotes a former Pentagon weapons proliferation official as saying that in fact the satellite dispensing technology is interchangeable with MIRV technology. A: I just told you that releasing, or parking a satellite in orbit does not require nearly as much precision as releasing multiple warheads does. I think it's not the same technology. Q: Your understanding of the dispensing system that is only accurate enough to deal with a satellite? A: It does not have the extreme accuracy that's required for independent targeted warheads to be released as a group, yes. ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html