The Missile Defense Systems Of George W Bush

This volume reviews the debates surrounding the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) defense systems and their deployment by George W. Bush, allowing readers to assess for themselves the significance of Bush's decisions. The Missile Defense Systems of George W. Bush: A Critical Assessment asks and answers a number of pressing questions about Bush's decision to deploy ground-based missiles. Has the system become reliable? If not, what are the prospects for it to become effective? What have the fiscal costs been? What was the political impact of efforts to expand ABM systems to Europe? This is the only major book that brings together all of the factors—historical and current—to allow readers to assess President Bush's decisions for themselves. Opening with an extensive history of missile defense, the book analyzes Bush's efforts to establish ground-based missiles in Eastern Europe, as well as the impact of his decisions. Both the administration's policies and evaluations and those of critical observers are presented. President Obama's program for missile defense is reviewed as well. A final chapter evaluates the technical progress of the various ABM systems and weighs the political dimensions of the deployment decision and the cost of the undertaking to date.

An in-depth assessment of Bush's military policy and defense strategy

A global leader of the antinuclear movement delivers “a meticulous, urgent, and shocking report” on US weapons policy and the imminent dangers it poses (Booklist). First published in the wake of the September 11 attacks in 2001, The New Nuclear Danger sounded the alarm against a neoconservative foreign policy dictated by weapons manufacturers. This revised and updated edition includes a new introduction that outlines the costs of Operation Iraqi Freedom, details the companies profiting from the war and subsequent reconstruction, and chronicles the rampant conflicts of interest among members of the Bush administration who also had a financial stake in weapons manufacturing. Named one of the Most Influential Women of the 20th Century by the Smithsonian and nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize for her antinuclear activism, Dr. Helen Caldicott’s expert assessment of US nuclear and military policy is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand the precarious state of the world. After eight printings in the original edition, The New Nuclear Danger remains a singularly persuasive argument for a new approach to foreign policy and a new path toward arms reduction. “A timely warning, at a critical moment in world history, of the horrible consequences of nuclear warfare.” —Walter Cronkite

Regional Missile Defense from a Global Perspective explains the origins, evolution, and implications of the regional approach to missile defense that has emerged since the presidency of George H. W. Bush, and has culminated with the missile defense decisions of President Barack Obama. The Obama administration's overarching concept for American missile defense focuses on developing both a national system of limited ground-based defenses, located in Alaska and California, intended to counter limited intercontinental threats, and regionally-based missile defenses consisting of mobile ground-based technologies like the Patriot PAC-3 system, and sea-based Aegis-equipped destroyer and cruisers. The volume is intended to stimulate renewed debates in strategic studies and public policy circles over the contribution of regional and national missile defense to global security. Written from a range of perspectives by practitioners and academics, the book provides a rich source for understanding the technologies, history, diplomacy, and strategic implications of the gradual evolution of American missile defense plans. Experts and non-experts alike—whether needing to examine the offense-defense tradeoffs anew, to engage with a policy update, or to better understand the debate as it relates to a country or region—will find this book invaluable. While it opens the door to the debates, however, it does not find or offer easy solutions—because they do not exist.

Missiles came of age after World War II and the United States has pursued missile defences ever since. The issue has turned out to be one of the most divisive of the past generation taking into account the Russian position and their threat or perceived threat and the technical difficulties of actually implementing any missile defence. The Bush Administration claims that for the first time an effective missile defence is technically possible and that the threat of weapons of mass destruction has spread to many nations and groups other that Russia. The two factors, according to them, make missile defence an urgent priority justifying the breaking of the widely-revered ABM Treaties. Their argument rests partially on a bet that the Russians have now fallen so far behind since the Yeltsin government took over that they cannot keep up technologically. Although terrorism groups will not be deterred by the missile defence being planned, countries like China, North Korea etc., might well be. This book frames the current debate and also presents the legal considerations for withdrawal from the ABM Treaties.

This volume in the Weapons of Mass Destruction series makes the case that the United States’ expansive missile defence policy has eroded both its own security and that of its allies. These findings are based on an examination of the response of a number of key states to U.S. policy, including Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. Situating their argument in the theoretical debate on balancing in unipolarity, the authors contrast their view to influential perspectives that see little evidence of hard balancing against the U.S. in the post-Cold War era. Adopting a neorealist perspective, the authors demonstrate the clear presence of this inter-state practice, providing insight into the international politics of unipolarity, showing how hard balancing and security dilemma-related dynamics operate in the contemporary strategic environment.

This book examines the transformation in US thinking about the role of Ballistic Missile Defence (BMD) in national security policy since the end of the Cold War. The evolution of the BMD debate after the Cold War has been complex, complicated and punctuated. As this book shows, the debate and subsequent policy choices would often appear to reflect neither the particular requirements of the international system for US security at any given time, nor indeed the current capabilities of BMD technology. Ballistic Missile Defence and US National Security Policy traces the evolution of policy from the zero-sum debates that surrounded the Strategic Defense Initiative as Ronald Reagan left office, up to the relative political consensus that exists around a limited BMD deployment in 2012. The book shows how and why policy evolved in such a complex manner during this period, and explains the strategic reasoning and political pressures shaping BMD policy under each of the presidents who have held office since 1989. Ultimately, this volume demonstrates how relative advancements in technology, combined with growth in the perceived missile threat, gradually shifted the contours and rhythm of the domestic missile defence debate in the US towards acceptance and normalisation. This book will be of much interest to students of missile defence and arms control, US national security policy, strategic studies and international relations in general.

American politicians have long been troubled by the question of whether or not to deploy a national missile defense system. The argument has focused upon the questions of cost, both political and fiscal, plus the reliability of the technologies. This study places that debate within the context of an ongoing controversy over the direction of American foreign and defense policy since the 1950s. Since that time several distinct worldviews (labeled Believers, Pragmatists, and Wilsonians) have been articulated, views which predetermine decision-makers' positions on national missile defense. Those worldviews structure how technology tests and costs are evaluated regardless of outcomes. Politics, not technological proficiency, drives policy decisions. In effect, the debate has been a dialogue of the deaf and blind wherein each perceives only that which fits their predetermined views. This controversy raises questions regarding the use of deterrence as the basis for national policy and the role of technology in making such decisions. Handberg places this debate within the historical flow of events, dating back to the first inkling that national missile defense might be possible. The arrival of the George W. Bush administration moves national missile defense to the forefront with the question of deployment now considered a near reality.