Concerns over American NMD
03 Aug, 2000 · 396
Dr. Chintamani Mahapatra comments on the international ramification of the US National Missile Defence
The Clinton Administration has authorized tests of a national missile defence (NMD) system during the fag end of his career and two out of three such tests have failed. The NMD programme has its origin in Ronald Reagan’s Star War idea-which was conceived in the midst of deadly Cold War between the
US
and the former
Soviet Union
. Why does
Washington
want to carry forward with this plan even after the Soviet collapse and end of the Cold War?
US
security planners justify it on the ground of meeting the challenges from countries of concerns, such as
North Korea
,
Iran
and
Iraq
, the real goal seems to be achieving yet another edge in militaty technology over others that can perpetuate its position as a single superpower of the world.
United States
were not forthcoming in endorsing the proposed US NMD System.
Washington
’s promise to pass on the system to European allies has not persuaded them to change their mind, since American success in this venture may further delay the efforts of European countries to establish a new regional identity. Clearly, Europeans want to reduce their dependence on the
United States
in the new context of the post-Cold War. Any arms race that may ensue as a result of the deployment of the NMD is bound to perpetuate
US
influence over
Europe
.
Moscow
and
Beijing
too have made a common cause against the American NMD programme.
Moscow
has both a legal objection to the deployment of the NMD and an economic rationale to oppose it. The
US
deployment of the NMD would constitute a clear violation of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, signed by the
US
and the former
USSR
. This treaty, concluded in the midst of a detente between the two super cold-warriors, aimed at restraining the missile race.
Moscow
fails to understand why
Washington
requires such a system a decade after the Soviet collapse. It does not buy the
US
argument that countries, such as
North Korea
,
Iran
and
Iraq
have provoked
Washington
to build such an expensive missile defence system. The
US
could, if it wants, discover other less expensive ways to fight the challenges from smaller missile powers.
Russia
has an economic rationale too in opposing NMD. While Russian scientists could develop their own version of NMD or could develop systems that may render NMD useless, the country simply cannot afford to squander its wealth on a new arms race. Russian priorities are today much different than in the past. Indulging in an arms race now could lead to national economic disaster. This is the reason why the Russian legislature, while ratifying the START II treaty, made it a condition that
Washington
would not deploy a national missile defence system.
China
and the
US
are neither friends nor enemies. Their relationship is marked by serious tension mixed with cooperation in several areas, particularly trade and investment. The
US
seems wary of the uncertain evolution of
China
and
China
appears suspicious of US motivations.
China
’s opposition stems from its worries over the possible extension of this technology to
Taiwan
. A successful NMD system can easily help in setting up a Theater Missile Defence (TMD) system. Once
Taiwan
is protected by this system,
China
’s missiles would be made useless.
China
would find it more difficult to achieve its goal of reunification of
Taiwan
with the mainland.
India
’s problems with the American NMD lies in its possible implications in
Southern Asia
.
China
would most likely indulge in expanding its missile stockpile and a chain reaction in the entire region may lead to an expensive and potentially dangerous weapons race. Moreover,
New Delhi
wonders how can
Washington
justify the missile defence programme at a time when it has tried to punish
India
with sanctions because of Indian decision to develop a nuclear deterrence capability to meet regional challenges?
Washington
should listen to voices within the
US
and outside and abandon the NMD programme. However, it is unlikely that it would do so. Besides the Administration, influential members of the US Senate and the US House of Representatives are strongly in favour of the NMD programme. They seem convinced that the NMD system would make the
US
stronger than the arms control measures
Washington
is involved with. However, there is little doubt that nothing can make the
United States
invincible. In fact, terrorist groups can pose a bigger danger to the
US
today than countries with smaller missile capabilities.
While the
This is probably the reason why even some of the European allies of the
Ever since the end of the Cold War,
After the second failure of the NMD tests,
POPULAR COMMENTARIES
