<<  <  >  >>

No. 337

March 16, 1999

NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE

Examining the Options

by Charles V. Peña and Barbara Conry

Executive Summary

provide protection against shorter-range ballistic

To date, the debate surrounding national mis-

missiles launched from ships, cruise missiles

sile defense (NMD) has been dominated by polit-

launched from aircraft or ships, or terrorist

ical rhetoric. Supporters (usually conservatives)

attacks. Supporters also need to recognize the

often paint a "doom-and-gloom" picture, point-

daunting technological challenge that NMD

ing out that the United States is vulnerable to an

poses.

attack by ballistic missiles. Critics (usually liber-

A limited NMD, which would afford the

als) defend the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as the

United States protection against long-range bal-

cornerstone of deterrence and stability and argue

listic missile threats from rogue states, is feasible

that any defensive deployment would upset the

and probably can be deployed at a reasonable

balance between the offensive strategic nuclear

cost. The elements of the Clinton administra-

forces of the United States and Russia.

tion's NMD program can provide such a capabil-

Opponents of NMD, who use the ABM treaty

ity. The debate should not be whether or not to

as an argument not to deploy a defense, need to

deploy defenses. It should be about the nature

acknowledge that the threat of attack by long-

and capabilities of a limited NMD system that

range ballistic missiles from rogue states may

would accomplish cost-effectively the mission of

become real. They also need to recognize that the

protecting the nation against threats from rogue

United States can build a limited NMD without

states.

disrupting the strategic nuclear balance.

No matter what the threat, however, the devel-

Supporters of NMD need to acknowledge that

opment of an NMD system should proceed at a

NMD is not a panacea for the full spectrum of

measured pace because an excessively rapid devel-

threats from rogue states--that long-range ballis-

opment program could waste taxpayer dollars on

tic missiles are only one of the options available

an ineffective system.

to those states to strike America. NMD will not

____________________________________________________________________________________

Charles V. Peña is an independent consultant on missile defense and Barbara Conry is an associate policy analyst at the Cato Institute.