go to top

Regardless of New START, Obama Should Limit U.S. Missile Defense

Wednesday, Sept. 15, 2010

Critics of the New START treaty charge that, if ratified, it would constrain U.S. missile defense plans. Whether or not the treaty's non-binding preamble supports their argument, the broader question regarding the future of missile defense is an important one. Missile defenses bolster deterrence and strengthen the security of U.S. allies, giving them a significant role to play in a fluid and dynamic contemporary security environment.

But regardless of the New START treaty, the Obama administration will have to limit U.S. missile defense plans if it wishes to remain credibly committed to future arms reduction agreements with Russia, as well as to widespread nuclear reductions and the possibility of global zero. This is in part because any expansion of missile defense in Europe is almost certain to be a spoiler in further nuclear arms reduction negotiations with Russia, themselves a precursor to wider cuts. Meanwhile, if the expansion of U.S. missile defenses in East Asia is perceived as a threat by China, it could undermine the region's entire nonproliferation structure. Finally, current U.S. missile defense plans are also likely to be naturally limited by both technological and budgetary constraints. ...

To read more,

enter your email address then choose one of the three options below.

Subscribe to World Politics Review and you'll receive instant access to 10,000+ articles in the World Politics Review Library, along with new comprehensive analysis every weekday . . . written by leading topic experts.