Transcript stephanie_potter

BALLISTIC MISSILE
DEFENSE
How Big is the Threat?
Bush’s promise
• 2000- Campaign pledge to deploy an effective missile
shield
• Presidential Promise
• December 17th, 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 that 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 18th, May 18th
• Wall Street Journal January 14th 2000
Is the present threat great
enough to justify the costs of
BMD?
• Opponents
• 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
– 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/pollmd2.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