Ballistic Missile Defense: An Administration Perspective

Abstract

Before one delves into any defense issue one must first begin with the underlying question: "What is our strategy?" What the Clinton Administration is doing with regard to strategic offensive systems provides an instructive context for what we re now trying to do on the strategic defensive side. To begin with, the Clinton Administration believes, fundamentally, that deterrence still matters. Why? Is it because we think that Russia is going to attack us today, tonight, tomorrow, next week, next month? No, of course not. We're working very hard--across the board--in many areas, not the least of which are arms control, denuclearization and the Nunn-Lugar initiatives, to make sure that we continue to strengthen strategic stability and assist Russia in its democratic and economic reforms. But, a strategic partnership with Russia is not a "for sure" conclusion yet. Thus, it is fundamental to this Administration's strategy that we are hedging against the requirement to reconstitute strategic deterrence in full form.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Jul 01, 1995
Accession Number
ADA394519

Entities

People

  • Robert G. Bell

Organizations

  • National Defense University

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Space
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Agreements
  • Anti-Ballistic Missiles
  • Arms Control
  • Ballistic Missiles
  • Congress
  • Deterrence
  • Fleet Ballistic Missiles
  • Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles
  • Military Organizations
  • National Security
  • Negotiations
  • Security
  • Treaties
  • United States
  • Ussr

Fields of Study

  • Political science

Readers

  • Strategic Security Studies