The End of MAD

June 23, 2002

by Brian W. Peterson

If North Korea launched a Taepo Dong missile at Los Angeles, what defensive measures could the United States take?

For the past nine months, national security concerns have been about airliners, concentrated attacks on a small scale (i.e. suitcase nuclear bombs), nuclear power plants and the like. The threat of a missile attack still looms, even while our focus remains on individuals in this country.

This month the US officially left the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which was signed by the US and the Soviet Union (Nixon and Brezhnev) 30 years ago. Even though one of the two entities has not existed for over a decade, the US still absurdly honored the treaty until June 13.

Discarding the treaty is a seminal event in the effort to protect Americans from a ballistic missile attack. Research into an anti-ballistic system is well underway and the results have been encouraging.

Derisively called “Star Wars” by opponents, what began as President Ronald Reagan’s “Strategic Defense Initiative” was and remains truly visionary. The mad world of MAD - Mutually Assured Destruction - that precariously deterred the superpowers from obliterating each other was nearing an end when President Reagan made the case for SDI.

Through modifications, delays, and even more ridicule, the reality of an anti-missile “umbrella” of protection draws nearer with every successful test. Hitting “a bullet with a bullet” was once said to be a product of Ronald Reagan’s foolish imagination. Today it is reality.

Without the unilateral constraints of the ABM Treaty hindering our technological gains, more complex testing can be completed. New ideas can be explored. Technology can advance.

Detractors claim that our development of an anti-ballistic missile system will create a new arms race. Countries like the People’s Republic of China will feel threatened and react accordingly. Some comfort that would be after New York City gets incinerated by an Iranian missile, knowing that at least the Chinese didn’t escalate their weapons production. We could learn to feel good about our intentions as the radiation spreads into Connecticut and Massachusetts.

The fact is, no matter the actions of the US, the PRC will build up its missile capabilities.

Detractors claim that a missile defense system costs too much, will take too long to deploy, and the technology is not yet in existence. When President John F. Kennedy announced that we would go to the moon, the technology did not yet exist to take us there. How much more important is protecting our nation from nuclear attack versus going to the moon?

But what the detractors say is irrelevant. We are building an anti-ballistic missile safety net. Indeed, this space shield will not protect us from a terrorist carrying a suitcase bomb, but the lack of a shield would not protect us from such an attack, either.

We know that the PRC has sold equipment that would aid the manufacture of ballistic missiles to Iran. We know that Iraq is working on numerous types of weapons of mass destruction, including missile technology. We know that the North Korean Taepo Dong rocket is a three-staged missile that can reach parts of the US.

The world is a dangerous place - even more so with the demise of the former Soviet Union. No longer does an expansive totalitarian regime prohibit some people from acting upon the evil that is within them.

If, God forbid, a terrorist does detonate a nuclear bomb within the United States, the quality of the nuclear material would not be “weapons grade” and thus would not cause widespread death and destruction. The same cannot be said of a ballistic nuclear missile.

To not move forward with missile defense would be immoral. One of the constitutional mandates for our government is to provide for our defense. The Bush administration is doing just that. Thanks to the demise of the ABM Treaty, we have something to celebrate - we are a step closer to protecting ourselves against annihilation.

For now, if North Korea launches a Taepo Dong missile at Los Angeles, we had just better hope that the Dodgers are on a road trip that day. Today, there is no defense against ballistic missiles. But tomorrow is coming quickly, thanks to the persistence of the Bush administration.

• Two outstanding resources on this subject can be found through The Heritage Foundation and The Claremont Institute’s Missile Threat.com.

_________________________________________

Brian W. Peterson writes a political column for the Antelope Valley Press (circulation approximately 60,000) in Palmdale, California. He is a graduate of Oral Roberts University, where he majored in TV/Film. Brian’s weekly commentary and newspaper columns can be found at www.LifeAndLiberty.com.

Send the author an E mail at Peterson@ConservativeTruth.org.

For more of Brian's articles, visit his archives.