New York Times on the Web Forums Science

Missile Defense

Russian military leaders have expressed concern about US plans for a national missile defense system. Will defense technology be limited by possibilities for a strategic imbalance? Is this just SDI all over again?

rshowalter - 05:26pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2911 of 2919)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

"And as expected, Mr. Bush did not go into specifics about hardware and technology during his 17-minute address, delivered here in a brilliant sunshine. He sought, rather, to persuade America's allies (and no doubt some politicians at home) to "rethink the unthinkable."

Comment 2: -- Rethinking sounds fine, so far as it goes -- but how many people, and groups, get to see the facts and assumptions involved in this rethinking. There might be millions of possible "rethinkings" - most very wrong. How can people and nations check?

"Today, the sun comes up on a vastly different world," Mr. Bush said in a speech at the National Defense University at Fort McNair. "Today's Russia is not yesterday's Soviet Union."

"Today's enemies, the President said, are not other superpowers but renegade states that promote terrorism. And despite the Soviet Union's demise a decade ago, today's world has more countries with nuclear weapons, "and still more with nuclear aspirations," Mr. Bush said.

Comment 3: But there may be a number of ways to deal with nuclear concerns -- missile defense, which seems a pipe dream, seems to be being considered to the exclusion of all others -- when we know anti-missile defense is now unworkable, and will be for many years -- and other approaches to peace and stability seem to many to be promising.

"Mr. Bush acknowledged what many skeptics have been saying: that the technology for building an anti-missile defense is uncertain at best. "We have much work to do to determine our final plan," he said. "We know that some approaches will not work."

Comment 4: He could have said that he knew of some that had promise- and neglected to do so. Is there any technical substance in Star Wars at all? Wasn't the 72 anti-missile treaty based on a hoax, and hasn't the whole thing been a hoax ever since? Even admitting that such deceptions may sometimes be "understandable" what about the money that has been spent, and never reasonably accounted for so much money -- there should be a lot to show -- and there is precious little. When this is money suspected of corrupting the American political process, the matter is serious --- and bears on the reaction to be expected of potential allies and adversaries, as well.

rshowalter - 05:26pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2912 of 2919)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

"But regardless of the obstacles, he said, the United States will move forward, reducing its own stores of nuclear weapons. "The United States will lead by example," he said.

COMMENT: I THINK THIS IS VERY CONSTRUCTIVE ! Enough "leading by example" here would, in my mind, cover a multitude of sins. I'm worried about the world blowing up, and a proper "example" here could keep that from happening.

"Mr. Bush reached out several times to "today's Russia," a country he said is "not our enemy," as the old Soviet Union was, but "a country in transition" toward freedom and democracy.

Comment: That seems to be a significant, and recent, change in tone. And it is entirely constructive.

"Accordingly, he said of Russia, "We are not and must not be strategic adversaries." Only hours before his speech, Mr. Bush called Russian President Vladimir V. Putin to discuss nuclear weapons and disarmament in general and to try to strike a tone of personal warmth.

"Mr. Bush's intention to veer away from the 1972 treaty, in which the United States and Soviet Union agreed, among other things, not to deploy or provide a new base for anti-ballistic missile systems, has been known for some weeks.

"That intention has caused unease among American allies in Europe and Asia, and Mr. Bush said today, as expected, that high-level representatives from the State and Defense departments and the National Security Council would travel soon to Europe, Asia, Australia and Canada to reassure officials there.

"These will be real consultations," Mr. Bush said pointedly, not mere briefings "on decisions already made."

Comment: If that is true, how firm is the missile defense decision itself? The technical proposal seems to have no merit at all -- it is based on wishful thinking -- should the whole world jump for this?

"Mr. Bush mentioned Russia several times in the context of friendship and cooperation. In contrast, he barely alluded to China as one of the powers to which Washington would reach out. It was a month ago today that an American surveillance plane was forced to land in China after colliding with a Chinese fighter, beginning an episode in which the Chinese detained 24 American crew members for a week and a half.

Comment: The administration is making some efforts to reach out to China as well -- as it should -- it makes no sense for the US and China to be enemies.

"The president's speech was certain to set off intensive debate, in Washington and across the oceans, but Mr. Bush said his country's course, and his own, was set for tomorrow, not yesterday. "The looking glass no longer stands its 24-hour vigil."

Setting a course for tomorrow is important. The stakes are high here, and the only beautiful solutions are going to have to involve answers that can be checked, answers that fit needs.

rshowalter - 05:30pm May 1, 2001 EST (#2913 of 2919)
Robert Showalter showalte@macc.wisc.edu

Dawn Riley and I believe that, with internet resources now available, and institutions like THE NEW YORK TIMES and some other great journalistic organizations, all over the world, there are means at hand to get the checking needed, and the careful reasoning needed, done well in ways that are totally accessible -- that everyone can understand.

THIS OPENNESS ABOUT BASIC FRAMEWORKS WOULD SERVE THE CAUSE OF PEACE -- AND BE EXPEDITIOUS, TOO.

This thread has been set out, in part, to try to move toward techniques and formats that could make that possible.

(6 following messages)

New York Times on the Web Forums Science Missile Defense