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 [see below] 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

• Framework Memorandum of Understanding on Ballistic Missile Defence
• Global Security and Non-Proliferation APPG
• National Missile Defense - the role of the UK
• nuclear weapons
• Proliferation Security Initiative
• Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) a.k.a. "Star Wars"
• weaponization of space
• weapons of mass destruction

External Links

Websites

• Arms Control Association / Arms Control Today website: Documents, etc., 1998 to present.
• "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

• "Ballistic Missile Defence Timeline (2005-1945)," CBC News (Canada).
• "Ballistic Missile Defense," NuclearFiles.org website.
• Issues 2004: "Missile Defense," Heritage Foundation website.
• Missile Defense News on spacewar.com website.
• "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.
• Proliferation News and Resources, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace website.

1998-1999

• "National Missile Defense: Even With Increased Funding, Technical and Schedule Risks Are High (Letter Report, GAO/NSIAD-98-153), General Accounting Office (GA0), June 23, 1998 (FAS website).
• "Pentagon Panel Urges National Missile Defense Delay," Council For A Livable World Education Fund Analysis, November 19, 1999.
• 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.

2000

• William D. Hartung and Michelle Ciarroca, "Tangled Web: The Marketing of Missile Defense 1994-2000," World Policy Institute, May 2000.
• "Missile Defense: Status of the National Missile Defense Program (Letter Report, GAO/NSIAD-00-131), General Accounting Office, May 31, 2000 (FAS website); Report (pdf).
• "National Missile Defense: Policy Issues and Technological Capabilities," IFPA.org, July 2000.
• Kim R. Holmes, Ph.D., Testimony: "National Missile Defense," Heritage Foundation, September 8, 2000.

2001

• "Bush Administration: Statements on Missile Defense, 2001 (by the month), Carnegie Endowment for International Peace website.
• "Rationale and Requirements for U.S. Nuclear Forces and Arms Control. Volume I. Executive Report," National Institute for Public Policy, January 2001.
• Wade Boese, "Bush Assembles Pro-Missile Defense National Security Team," Arms Control Today, January/February 2001.
• "President Bush's National Missile Defense Plan. Too much, too little, or just right?" Brookings Institution, May 2, 2001.
• George Will, "Bush and Missile Defense," TownHall.com, May 10, 2001.
• "The Coyle Report: A Comprehensive Pentagon Study Criticizing the National Missile Defense Test Program, from the Director of Operational Test and Evaluation, Defense Department," August 10, 2000, released May 31, 2001.
• Robert Wright, "How Missile Defense Would Help Terrorists," Slate, September 13, 2001.

2002

• Philip Coyle, "Rhetoric or Reality? Missile Defense Under Bush," Arms Control Today, May 2002.
• Michelle Ciarrocca and William D. Hartung, "Axis Of Influence: Behind the Bush Administration's Missile Defense Revival," World Policy Institute, July 2002.
• White House Press Release: "President Announces Progress in Missile Defense Capabilities," December 17, 2002.
• Fred Kaplan, "Bombs Away. Bush's indefensible missile-defense plan," Slate, December 17, 2002.

2003

• Frida Berrigan, "Critique of 'Star Wars': Missile Defense Deployment: Still Dangerous, Costly, and Irrelevant to Present Threat," Baltimore Chronicle, January 2003. [Note: "Frida Berrigan, a Baltimore native and daughter of the late anti-war and anti-nuclear weapons activist Philip Berrigan, is a Senior Research Associate at the World Policy Institute in New York."]
• Joseph Cirincione, "Declining Ballistic Missile Threat," Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, April 23, 2003 (Taken from Project Director Joseph Cirincione's presentation before the Danish Parliament - The Folketing.)
• White House Fact Sheet: "National Policy on Ballistic Missile Defense Fact Sheet," May 20, 2003.
• "Missile Defense Test Fails," CBS/AP, June 19, 2003.
• "Additional Knowledge Needed in Developing System for Intercepting Long-Range Missiles," Government Accounting Office, August 2003; Report to the Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Financial Management, the Budget, and International Security, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate.
• Peter Coyle, "Is Missile Defense on Target?" Arms Control Today, October 2003.
• Randy Barrett, "Missile Defense Deployment, Criticism Continue in Parallel," Space News, October 18, 2004.
• "Raytheon Delivers Deployment STANDARD Missile-3 Rounds to Missile Defense Agency," PR Newswire, October 22, 2004.
• Dennis M. Gormley, "Missile Defence Myopia: Lessons from the Iraq War," Survival, Winter 2003/2004.
• Randy Barrett, "Missile Defense Tests Slip But Deployment Schedule Holds," Space News, December 23, 2003.

2004

• "Bush's Budget Includes Boost for Missile Defense," AP, February 2, 2004.
• 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.
• "Briefing Book on Ballistic Missile Defense," Center for Arms Control and Non-Proliferation, May 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.) Note: There are numerous other related article links on the righthand side of the page.
• "On Eve of Key Defense Authorization Vote, 31 Former Government Officials Call Missile Defense Deployment 'Sham'," Center for Defense Information, May 7, 2004.
• Wade Boese, "U.S. Eyes Missile Defense Site in Europe," Arms Control Today, July/August 2004.
• "Mission Not Accomplished. Missile Defense Slated for 2004 Deployment Ignores Technical Reality," Union of Concerned Scientists, September 2004.
• Wade Boese, "Missile Defense: Deploying a Work in Progress," Arms Control Today, September 2004.
• Baker Spring, "The Operational Missile Defense Capability: A Historic Advance for the Defense of the American People," Heritage Foundation, September 22, 2004.
• Bradley Graham, "Interceptor System Set, But Doubts Remain. Network Hasn't Undergone Realistic Testing," Washington Post, September 29, 2004.
• Nicole E. Evans, "Missile defense: Winning minds, not hearts," Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, September/October 2004: "The U.S. plan to build a global missile defense has been gaining international support, but not because other governments believe it will make their countries safer."
• Michelle Ciarrocca, "Missile Defense All Over Again," Foreign Policy in Focus, October 2004.
• 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.
• "Ka-boom or bust: The U.S. missile defence system," CBC News (Canada), December 6, 2004.
• Ivan Eland, "Kill Missile Defense Now," antiwar.com, December 21, 2004.

2005

• Joseph Cirincione, "The Declining Ballistic Missile Threat, 2005," Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, February 2005.
• Status of Ballistic Missile Defense Program in 2004 (GAO-05-243), Government Accounting Office, March 2005.
• Bradley Graham, "Missile Defense Director Moves to End Test Glitches. Equipment Review Ordered; Admiral to Oversee Preparations," Washington Post, March 10, 2005.
• Peter Huessy, "Defending missile defense," Washington Times, March 22, 2005.
• Walter Pincus, "Plans by U.S. to Dominate Space Raising Concerns. Arms Experts Worried at Pentagon Push for Superiority," Washington Post, March 29, 2005.
• Jeff Kueter, "Build missile defense before it's too late," Boston Globe, March 29, 2005.