by John M. Curtis
(310) 204-8700

Copyright July 17, 2001
All Rights Reserved.

itting the bull’s-eye, the Pentagon breathed new life in President Bush’s Missile Defense Program, pulling off a major public relations coup, completing a successful test of the U.S.’s fledgling antimissile system. One hundred and forty-four miles into the stratosphere above the South Pacific a Pentagon “kill vehicle” successfully hit and destroyed its target, a dummy Minuteman II Intercontinental Ballistic Missile [ICBM], causing high-fives at the Pentagon and long faces in Moscow. “We believe we have a successful test in all respects at this time,” said Air Force Lt. Gen. Ronald Kadish, the director of the Ballistic Missile Defense Program at the Pentagon. Exploding its target, the successful test sent shockwaves through the Kremlin, witnessing the first serious crack in the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, since Reagan began preaching “Star Wars” in 1980. Fifty-six years of Cold War and the madness of Mutual Assured Destruction [MAD], the simple test drew sour reviews from Russian President Vladimir V. Putin.

       Reactions to the successful test came fast and furious. “The question arises once again: Why should the entire architecture of agreements in nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation—and its cornerstone, the 1972 ABM Treaty—be put under threat?” said Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko. With the ABM treaty pushing 3O, it’s about time to take inventory. President Bush already noted that the treaty out-lived its usefulness, no longer affording the U.S. protection against rogue nations expected to develop ballistic missiles in the next 10 years. But Moscow’s saber-rattling shouldn’t dictate U.S. defense strategy now faced with the daunting task of revamping the U.S. military. While politically unpopular, missile defense represents an intangible security to a generation of Cold War baby-boomers, unwilling to surrender to Mutual Assured Destruction. Today’s generation rejects “drop drills” and fallout shelters, preferring to see the light of day in managing nuclear threat. “Our goal is to render nuclear weapons obsolete,” said Ronald Reagan, explaining the rationale behind his “Star Wars” missile defense program.

       Critics back then scorned a missile defense shield as pure “science fiction,” not comprehending Reagan’s vision that one day the world could get out from under the threat of nuclear annihilation. After years of building nuclear arsenals and negotiating defective arms control agreements, antimissile defense became a logical antidote to unending nuclear threat. Echoes from the old chorus of negativity, “Given the relative simplicity of the test, it shouldn’t be seen as a justification to move toward a system,” said Thomas Z Collina, a spokesperson for Union of Concerned Scientists, a group opposed to missile defense. Criticizing the Pentagon’s recent test, Collina doubted whether the present antimissile interceptor could handle multiple incoming warheads and decoys. “Until they’ve tested against all that, they’re not really testing the system.” How ludicrous to criticize a system presently in development. Research and development always involve pushing the envelope and breaking new ground. No scientist expects perfection in the early stages of any invention—especially cutting-edge space technology. Sounding more realistic about the successful test, “[this is] more evidence that the technology is there—that we can hit a bullet with a bullet,” reflected Jack Spencer, a missile defense expert at the conservative Heritage Foundation in Washington.

       Attaching the new airlock on the permanent manned space station, scientists have come along way from the days of rocketing astronauts into space and plucking them out of the sea. Matching the best minds and ingenuity to the task, there’s little doubt in Russia’s mind that the U.S. can build a credible missile defense shield. Opposed by Russia and China and much of the third world, America’s antimissile plan must proceed not on foreign approval but precisely because it’s the next best step in national security. Watching Chinese President Jiang Zemin and Putin embrace should remind Bush that America must follow a lonely path. Suggesting that his antimissile program pushed the two Eurasian superpowers into a strategic alliance forgets their anti-imperialist pact signed in 1950 by Joseph Stalin and Mao Tse-Tung. Pouncing on a golden opportunity to slap the U.S., Putin secured lucrative arms’ deals with the world’s most populace regime. “This treaty pertains primarily to the relationship between China and the Russian Federation,” said Putin, “But we also assume that the treaty will be an important element in contemporary international relations,” implying that their alliance counters U.S. hegemony.

       Putin’s no dummy nailing down future arms’ sales. With only about $8 billion in annual trade with China, Russia’s couldn’t afford U.S. encroachment, already eclipsed by a whopping $115 billion, covering everything under the sun. When America’s EP-3 spy plane crash-landed on Hainan Island in the South China Sea on April 1, U.S.-Sino relations took a new turn. Playing hardball, China reminded America who was calling the shots, especially in Asia where they flex their muscles. God help Taiwan should China ever conclude that the U.S. lacks the moral and political will to defend the renegade republic. There’s little doubt that had the spying mishap occurred in Russia, the outcome would have been the same. More than ever, the U.S. must cover its flanks, realizing that hostile nations won’t cut Uncle Sam much slack. Missile Defense—primitive as it is—gives the U.S. a strategic advantage by rendering the country less vulnerable to ICBM’s. Along with creating “smart technology” comes the fringe benefits of developments not yet seen. Not only does missile defense create jobs, it gives the U.S. a psychological edge by warning competitors that the U.S. intends to maintain its technological superiority.

       Taking inventory, the U.S. cannot retreat from its commitment to develop sophisticated antimissile technology. While remaining sensitive to international concerns, reviving “Star Wars” is the next step in the evolution of nuclear disarmament, no longer dependent on adversaries negotiating questionable arms’ treaties. Without dismantling nuclear arsenals, there’s no better way to achieve disarmament than to render long-range nuclear weapons obsolete. Tough talk from Moscow or Beijing won’t change Russia’s long history of gaining strategic advantage by holding the U.S. hostage to the threat of a first strike. Despite tweaking the ABM treaty, developing effective antimissile defense puts adversaries on notice that the U.S. fully expects to lower its future nuclear risk. Antimissile defense doesn’t destabilize the arms’ race, it makes the U.S. less vulnerable to nuclear blackmail by either superpowers or rogue nations. While some complain about the price tag, no one should doubt the technology or complain about the sacrifice needed to make the world a safer place.

About the Author

John M. Curtis is editor of OnlineColumnist.com and columnist for the Los Angeles Daily Journal. He’s director of a Los Angeles think tank specializing in political consulting and strategic public relations. He’s the author of Dodging The Bullet and Operation Charisma.

©1999-2012 Discobolos Consulting Services, Inc.
(310) 204-8300
All Rights Reserved.