Because the regional powers that pursue weapons of mass destruction usually are led by unstable or insecure leaders, there is doubt that they can be included in a stable deterrence regime. However, the arsenals they acquire are so modest that missile defense is far more feasible against them than it would be against a country like China. Building missile defenses may strengthen the prospects for deterrence by reducing the tactical value of small arsenals.

A typical U.S. Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missile launch illustrates two of the reasons why boost-phase interception is often more advantageous than attempting interception later in the trajectory.

The bright exhaust plume of the booster is relatively easy for remote sensors to detect and track, and in some cases the point of origin for launches will be known in advance -- enabling defensive forces to position themselves during a crisis for early interception.

The U.S. government has funded many missile-defense initiatives in the five decades since the Soviet Union launched its first intercontinental ballistic missile. Early programs like Sentinel and Safeguard were designed to use ground-based interceptors armed with nuclear warheads, but the destructive side effects of those weapons led the U.S. armed forces and government to pursue other approaches.

One alternative was putting high-power lasers in space, as proposed by U.S. President Ronald Reagan in his 1983 Strategic Defense Initiative. That concept was abandoned when the Cold War ended because of high costs, immature technology and fears it might cause an arms race.

The biggest problem that American proponents of missile defense faced during the latter decades of the Cold War was that the Soviet Union's nuclear arsenal was huge and could easily overwhelm any defensive system then feasible. The same was true of the United States' own nuclear arsenal at that time.

So the two superpowers of the United States and the Soviet Union focused mainly on stabilizing the nuclear balance. But other powers were gradually joining the nuclear club, and as they did, U.S. leaders became concerned that the leaders of these nations might not be as tractable as the Soviets and their Russian successor state had been.

-- (Part 5: The Clinton administration's $60 billion plan to build radars and interceptor missiles that could defend all 50 U.S. states against a limited nuclear attack.)

(Loren B. Thompson is chief executive officer of the Lexington Institute, an Arlington, Va.-based think tank that supports democracy and the free market.)

(United Press International's "Outside View" commentaries are written by outside contributors who specialize in a variety of important issues. The views expressed do not necessarily reflect those of United Press International. In the interests of creating an open forum, original submissions are invited.)

Share This Article With Planet Earth

del.icio.us	Digg	Reddit
YahooMyWeb	Google	Facebook

Related Links
Learn about missile defense at SpaceWar.com
Learn about nuclear weapons doctrine and defense at SpaceWar.com
All about missiles at SpaceWar.com
Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News