BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE How Big is the Threat

BALLISTIC MISSILE DEFENSE How Big is the Threat?

Bush’s promise • 2000 - Campaign pledge to deploy an effective missile shield • Presidential Promise • December 17 th, 2002 - Promised to have a Ballistic Missile Defense Program running by 2004 -2005 – Presidential Address

Is the threat to the United States strong enough to merit rushing an incomplete Ballistic Missile Defense Program? • Important to understand the threat in order to plan an appropriate defense • 2 opposing camps – Proponents of ballistic missile defense • Conservatives • Believe that an imminent threat exists that makes it necessary to speed up our ballistic missile defense program – Opponents of ballistic missile defense • Liberals • Believe that the threat the United States presently faces from the nuclear states is not great enough to merit rushing a defense program that has not been fully developed

Main points of Disagreement • Testing • Costs • Countermeasures

Is testing necessary? • Proponents – Not necessary to test – Testing will reveal the secrets of our defense capabilities – Current defensive capabilities are sufficient for primitive nuclear missile attacks – Test • Opponents – Only 8 of the 19 tests have been conducted, and with mixed results • Tests start out simple and get more complex • Only simple tests have been conducted; still in R & D phase – Tests that have been conducted have not been accurate because the testing conditions were not realistic • Simplified tests • Involved “surrogate components” (i. e. slower defensive rockets than the ones that would be used in a real situation; GPS satellites) – The government has been misrepresenting the testing success they have had • NY Times April 18 th, May 18 th • Wall Street Journal January 14 th 2000

Is the present threat great enough to justify the costs of BMD? • Proponents – Defense needs to be number one priority of the United States government – The nuclear states, specifically North Korea, Russia, China, Iran and Iraq, have made huge technological gains • Most countries that have the technology can produce nuclear arms within a matter of months • Russia and China have longrange ballistic missiles capable of reaching the United States • North Korea, Iran and Iraq are within 10 years of having missiles that can reach United States • Opponents – The government is devoting too much money to ballistic missile defense • 10 billion dollars a year too much to spend • Spending billions of dollars to defend against a threat that does not exist – North Korea not as much of a military threat as a proliferation threat • Country low on moneycan’t even afford the fuel to keep their fighter pilots in the air • It is profitable to sell nuclear secrets and materials

The question of countermeasures • Proponents – The nations that we face as threats do not possess the ability to produce countermeasures complex enough to deceive our defenses • Must keep in mind who it is we are defending against (North Korea’s economic resources; sophistication of Soviet Union) • We have prepared for countermeasures which are far more complex than anything the offense could use • Opponents – Too many unknowns • BMD program cannot be pushed forward before we understand how to deal with the countermeasures of the offense • We do not yet know what countermeasures are within the technological capabilities of the threatening nuclear states, nor how effective our program would be in defending against them – Countermeasures

Question: So, what does the rest of America think? Answer: It depends on who you talk to • Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance (MDAA) – Conducted polls of registered voters in AZ, MS, NH, SC and PA over the past year (most recent 05/26/04) – 78% support the plan to deploy a partial missile defense system in 2004 Insert graph here

The Other Side of Public Opinion: • Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers – April 2000 survey of 1000 adults was conducted by the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, the Council for a Livable World Education Fund, and the Fourth Freedom Forum – 59% support waiting to decide on deployment of national missile defenses until after the 19 tests are complete

How Can This Be? • Contradicting polls results have been published on a continual basis over the past 10 years • Both sides use techniques to skew the results: – Preliminary questions to elevate concerns • Remind people about continuing Russian/ Chinese threat – Introductory clause • “knowing that…” (US cannot currently stop one incoming missile…/ many scientists conclude that it is unlikely such a system will work…) – Compare costs to another cause (popular/unpopular) • Health care and education/ peacekeeping in Bosnia

What Does This Mean? • Poll results do not always give an accurate representation of public opinion • The ease at which the opinions of respondents can be skewed could indicate a general lack of knowledge of Ballistic Missile Defense, and lack of exposure to all sides of the issue • Political propaganda, world events, and the media are also reasons for constant fluctuations in results

Where Do You Stand?

Work Cited • Special Thanks To: – Dean Wilkening – Michael May – Carlos Seligo – Dena Slothower • Work Cited – Butler, Richard. Fatal Choice. Cambridge: Westview Press, 2001. – Carter, Ashton B. ed. and N. Schwartz, ed. Ballistic Missile Defense. Washington D. C. : The Brookings Institution, 1984. – www. clw. org/coalition/pollmd 2. htm – http: //www. brookings. edu/views/op-ed/ohanlon/20040412. htm – http: //www. state. gov/t/ac/rls/fs/2001/4892. htm – http: //www. ucsusa. org/ – http: //www. whitehouse. gov/news/releases/2002/12/20021217. html – http: //www. clw. org/pub/clw/coalition/polling. htm#bmd