Ballistic Missile Defense

With the end of the Cold War, "today's most urgent threat stems not from thousands of ballistic missiles in the Soviet hands, but from a small number of missiles in the hands of these states, states for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life. They seek weapons of mass destruction to intimidate their neighbors, and to keep the United States and other responsible nations from helping allies and friends in strategic parts of the world" (Bush 2001). "These states" refer to rogue states, such as Libya, Iran and North Korea. George W. Bush made this statement on May 1, 2001.

Even so, the next attack on the American highest ideal of liberty would be the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. This event proved that the United States must be prepared for war. There are nations and groups that would seek to destroy the American way of life, which is symbolized in the ideals of democracy and freedom. "These states" will use any and all means available to them.

The means of war have changed and it is no longer simply swords and spears or even cannons and bullets, but sophisticated weaponry, such as ballistic missiles (Kennedy 2002). Without the strategic capability of a ballistic missile defense (BMD), these enemies can continue plans to acquire the technology to exploit the weaknesses in the defence of the North American continent. With the current emphasis on the terrorist threat, the rogue states can focus on plans to develop ballistic missiles. The possibility remains that "these states" might develop the technology and then share it with members of a terrorist group, such as al-Qaeda.

The development of a BMD is delegated to the Missile Defense Agency whose mission "is to develop an integrated, layered Ballistic Missile Defense System to defend the United States, its deployed forces, allies and friends from ballistic missiles of all ranges and in all phases of flight" (MDA 2006). Hopefully, the need will never arise to utilize the BMD but the US should be prepared.

A system of BMD would give the US a competitive edge in the same way that the Manhattan Project gave the US an edge in facilitating the end of World War II. Without the scientific developments of the Manhattan Project, there would not have been corresponding developments in civilian technology. Innovation in technology that aids and protects humanity comes through the military-industrial complex. Without it, the world would still be living in the dark ages.

The Commission To Assess the Ballistic Missile Threat to the United States (The Rumsfeld Commission) of 1998 stated "For those seeking to thwart the projection of U.S. power, the capability to combine ballistic missiles with weapons of mass destruction provides a strategic counter to U.S. conventional and information-based military superiority" (Rumsfeld 1998).

The issues surrounding the deployment of a BMD should not be overlooked. Factors of cost, the drawbacks of technical sufficiency, and the dangers of an arms race escalation must be considered. However, the benefits of having a system of BMD surely outweigh the dangers of not having one. Without the preparation and deployment of a BMD, the states of Russia and China will continue to support the ballistic missile development of rogue states like Libya, North Korea and Iran.

In fact, Bob Dole introduced the Defend America Act of 1996 to Congress, which stated in Section 2 (2) "The threat that is posed to the national security of the United States by the proliferation of ballistic missiles is significant and growing, both quantitatively and qualitatively" (Dole 1996). Despite the fact that this Act failed to pass, the situation noted in the Act is still true.

Further thoughts in the Act expressed in Section 2 (8) include "The timely deployment by the United States of an effective national missile defense system will reduce the incentives for countries to develop or otherwise acquire intercontinental ballistic missiles, thereby inhibiting as well as countering the proliferation of missiles and weapons of mass destruction" (Dole 1996).

According to the Rumsfeld Commission, a nation that would seek to destabilize the US by engaging in an ICBM attack is very capable of achieving that goal within five years. By preparing and deploying a BMD, the US deters the capability of developing an ICBM as an efficient means of attack by those rogue nations (1998).

John Tierney states "Spending on any national missile defense must not adversely affect readiness or military personnel quality of life" (2001). And this is true, but the defense of the nation must not be left with a gaping hole. To this end, a BMD must be developed to correct the gaping hole in readiness against ballistic missiles, requiring the abandonment of the 1972 ABM treaty, which was premised on "the doctrine that our very survival would best be insured by leaving both sides completely open and vulnerable to nuclear attack" (Bush 2001). The idea of Mutually Assured Destruction worked well in

...