May 16th, 2008
NMD - Unnecessary, Ineffective, and Provocative
In March and April, the House National Security and Foreign Affairs Subcommittee held three hearings on the national missile defense (NMD) system. Originally conceived by President Reagan, and known as the Strategic Defense Initiative (nicknamed Star Wars by critics), the concept of NMD was to use space-based interceptors or nuclear-bomb pumped lasers to shoot down hostile intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM). Currently, the NMD program plans to use ground based interceptor missiles to intercept missiles in space (for more information, see http://www.fas.org/spp/starwars/program/nmd/). Testimony from General Oberling, Director of the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), claims “…we’ve made progress in our fielding and testing and have taken major steps to defend our homeland and our deployed forces and allies in the Pacific.” From the point of view of MDA, this sounds like the next great military masterpiece for the United States. What could possibly be wrong with this picture? Unfortunately, quite a bit.
Realistically, the NMD is not quite the grand defense mechanism that it is made out to be by the MDA. Already, the NMD program has cost taxpayers an estimated $150 billion, with an expected additional cost of $213 to $277 billion through 2025. With the enormous amount of money being spent, just what can we expect from this system? As it turns out, not much, according to expert witnesses that also testified at the congressional hearings last month. To begin with, the NMD is almost completely useless against decoys and countermeasures. As Dr. Richard Garwin, one of America’s most eminent physicists, and the 2003 recipient of the National Medal of Science from President Bush, testified. “Should a state be so misguided as to attempt to deliver nuclear weapons by ICBM, they could be guaranteed against intercept in midcourse by the use of appropriate countermeasures.” Mr. Phillip Coyle III, Senior Advisor to the Center for Defense Information, likens the NMD to “shooting a hole in one when the hole is going 17,000 mph and the green is covered with black circles the same size as the hole.” While in theory the NMD sounds appealing as a protectionist measure against nuclear missiles, the reality of the situation is that the government is funneling ridiculous sums of money into a system that has a minimal chance of actually protecting against nuclear missiles if the enemy can utilize decoys and countermeasures. The administration’s push for NMD also does not take into account that it is more likely for a nuclear weapon to be smuggled in through a ship’s cargo or across the border, yet spending on this system is ten times more than is spent on the protection of mass transit and ports (i.e. radiation detection).
The latest addition to the Bush Administration’s plan for the NMD is to place missile interceptors in Poland and Czech Republic. While the US justifies these sites as protection from potential missile strikes from Iran, Russia finds the placement of such interceptors as a threat to its security and has threatened to target these sites. In attempting to protect against one “threat” (Iran), the US opens itself up to another, more credible and potentially more dangerous threat. Russian President Vladimir Putin feels strongly that the placement of these missile interceptors is a huge barrier to U.S.-Russia relations. According to Mr. Coyle, tensions between the two countries are escalating to Cold War level over this recent development. Clearly, the Bush Administration needs to rethink its position in order to prevent adding new enemies to an ever growing list
