National Missile Defense

The most current acronym for National Missile Defense employed by the U.S. Department of Defense is Ground-based Midcourse Defense, which is "presently under the aegis of the Missile Defense Agency," as of April 29, 2005.

Objective of NMD

"The objective of the National Missile Defense (NMD) program is to develop and maintain the option to deploy a cost effective, operationally effective, and Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) compliant system that will protect the United States against limited ballistic missile threats, including accidental or unauthorized launches or Third World threats.

"The primary mission of National Missile Defense is defense of the United States (all 50 states) against a threat of a limited strategic ballistic missile attack from a rogue nation. Such a system would also provide some capability against a small accidental or unauthorized launch of strategic ballistic missiles from more nuclear capable states. The means to accomplish the NMD mission are as follows:

• Field an NMD system that meets the ballistic missile threat at the time of a deployment decision.
• Detect the launch of enemy ballistic missile(s) and track.
• Continue tracking of ballistic missile(s) using ground based radars.
• Engage and destroy the ballistic missile warhead above the earth’s atmosphere by force of impact."

Source: Global Security.

Quotes

• "The NMD is a unilateral, one-country plan and not multi-lateral. Because it violates the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty between Russia and the USA, I fear that other non-proliferation agreements may fall as well. And then we will be back in a very dangerous Cold War situation again, except with many more players eager to join this new race." --Aqqaluk Lynge, President, Inuit Circumpolar Conference [1]

History

"The National Missile Defense Program was originally a technology development effort. In 1996, at the direction of the Secretary of Defense, NMD was designated a Major Defense Acquisition Program and transitioned to an acquisition effort. Concurrently, BMDO was tasked with developing a deployable system within three years. This three-year development period culminated in 2000, and the Department of Defense began a Deployment Readiness Review in June 2000. Using that review, President Clinton was to make a deployment decision based on four criteria: the potential ICBM threat to the United States; the technical readiness of the NMD system; the projected cost of the NMD system; and potential environmental impact of the NMD system. Rather than make a decision, President Clinton deferred the deployment decision to his successor. The White House in choosing this action cited several factors. Among them were the lack of test under realistic conditions, the absence of testing of the booster rocket, and lingering questions over the system's ability to deal with countermeasures. The deployment decision now rests with President George W. Bush, who is reexamining the Clinton NMD system along with a variety of other proposals. In the meantime, work is continuing on technology development for the NMD system."

Source: Global Security.

Related SourceWatch Resources

• nuclear weapons
• Strategic Defense Initiative
• National Missile Defense - the role of the UK
• weaponization of space

External Links

Websites

• "Making Missile Defense a Reality," Missile Defense Agency website.
• "National Missile Defense: The Arctic Dimension" and "Fort Greely, Alaska, and National Missile Defense," arcticcircle.uconn.edu, accessed May 28, 2005.

General

• "National Missile Defense," PBS Online NewsHour website. Extensive links to PBS focus segments, including:

• "President Bush formally announces the U.S. intention to withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty," December 13, 2001, and "Following President Bush's announcement that the U.S. would withdraw from the ABM treaty, Russian President Vladimir Putin spoke to his nation about the U.S. move."

• "National Missile Defense" in the Wikipedia.
• "National Missile Defense," Global Security, orginally posted on Federation of American Scientists (FAS) website; accessed May 28, 2005.

Articles & Commentary

• John E. Pike, "National Missile Defense: Rushing to Failure," FAS, November/December 1999.
• Charles D. Ferguson, "Bait and Switch: Is Anti-North Korean Missile Defense Designed for China?" FAS, November/December 1999.
• Robert Wright, "How Missile Defense Would Help Terrorists," Slate, September 13, 2001.
• Fred Kaplan, "Bush's Latest Missile-Defense Folly. Why spend billions on a system that might never work?" Slate, March 12, 2004.
• Paul Waldman, "Incoming! The Bush administration's faith-based belief in missile defense," The Gadflyer, April 6, 2004.
• "Technical Realities: An Analysis of the 2004 Deployment of a U.S. National Missile Defense System," Union of Concerned Scientists, May 2004: (executive summary from the May 2004 UCS report Technical Realities: An Analysis of the 2004 Deployment of a U.S. National Missile Defense System.)
• Richard L. Garwin, "Holes in the Missile Shield. The national missile defense now being deployed by the U.S. should be replaced with a more effective system," Scientific American, October 25, 2004.