New Directions in Missile Defense Policy,
Abstract
One of the most serious security challenges the US will face over the next 10-20 years is the proliferation of both weapons of mass destruction and the means to deliver them - ballistic missiles. To the extent that we have achieved consensus on meeting this threat, it was with the 1991 and 1992 Missile Defense Act. The heart of the Missile Defense Act is to provide the United States with protection against limited missile attacks using space-based sensors, ground-based interceptors, and follow-on technologies to come. A very important part of this is theater defense. I believe that the Clinton Administration has correctly moved theater defense to the number one priority over the next five to seven years. There is a consensus on that priority in Congress. A critical part of the Missile Defense Act is its call for the US to maintain strategic stability that defenses would be deployed in a limited way so as not to cross the threshold where deterrence itself would be threatened. That must be avoided is a first-strike capability for either side. Finally, the Missile Defense Act moves forward to clarify the ABM Treaty and to seek modest changes and amendments to the treaty as required. Before moving on to further discussion of missile defense issues, Jet me review what the Senate Armed Services Committee has concluded on the FY 1994 Defense Authorization Bill. We finished our mark mindful of the change in leadership at the White House and the Department of Defense. We did not view this year as an appropriate time to make revolutionary suggestions for change. We did make some important changes and suggestions, however.
Document Details
- Document Type
- Technical Report
- Publication Date
- Jul 27, 1993
- Accession Number
- ADA339147
Entities
People
- Sam Nunn