National Missile Defense 2015: An Unintended Consequence

摘要

Two of the most enduring vital national interests are the protection of U.S. citizens and our territory. Driven by these interests, the United States began testing a limited national missile defense system intended to protect the country from missile attacks by 'rogue' states. By the summer of 2000, missile testing for the national missile defense (NMD) proved inconclusive. This forced President Clinton to defer the deployment decision to the next administration. Given the wide political support for the defense system, however, the president authorized further missile tests. In an example of 'all politics is local', debate in the United States centered on our technological superiority and the ability to fund the system. Little consideration was given to international consequences beyond the restrictive provisions of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty. In many quarters, the treaty was viewed as an anachronism of the Cold War when the superpower arms race was out of control. Faced with the fact that the United States would abrogate the treaty unilaterally, Russia reluctantly agreed to amend it. The American campaign to develop a protective shield against ballistic nuclear missiles provoked serious concern among our European allies. They contended that NMD would prompt an arms race with China and Russia and weaken the political and military links between the United States and Europe. German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer stated: 'There is no doubt that this would lead to split security standards within the NATO alliance.' He believed Germany's commitment to be non-nuclear 'was always based on our trust that the United States would protect our interests, that the United States, as the leading nuclear power, would guaranteed some sort of order.'1 'Congressional moves to break out of multilateral nuclear arms control are making the world more unsafe without making the United States any safer,' a French official said.