LINK: NMD DESTROYS BIPARTISANSHIP
NMD CONTROVERSY WILL SHATTER BIPARTISANSHIP
Alton Frye, Presidential Senior Fellow of the Council on Foreign Relations, 2001 Spring The Washington Quarterly SECTION: CAN FOREIGN POLICY BE BIPARTISAN?; Analyzing Politics; Vol. 24, No. 2; Pg. 107 HEADLINE: The Opportunity Is Real //VT2002acsln
The most challenging task the administration has set for itself centers on the divisive problem of national missile defense (NMD). Balancing the congressional demand for defenses against ballistic missiles with the strong international consensus favoring retention of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty limiting such defenses will be an exceedingly difficult feat. Given the stage of the relevant technologies, Clinton's decision to defer a deployment decision made sense, but candidate Bush raised the stakes by stressing his commitment to defenses for both the United States and other friendly countries. The NMD system architecture planned by the Clinton administration, although reflecting relatively near-term options offered by technology, clearly could not manage that more expansive mission. Yet, it is not clear what kind of system Bush officials may favor, and they are likely to face severe cross-pressures as the military services give priority to other procurements and opinion in Congress remains splintered. Senator Gordon Smith (R-Oreg.), one of the rising stars on the Foreign Relations Committee, has cautioned that the more global deployment apparently contemplated during the Bush campaign is "not a system likely to pass in the Senate." U.S. allies in Europe, particularly sensitive to the danger that a unilateral move on NMD could snarl relations with Russia and lead to a reversal of the last decade's trend toward military restraint, oppose any action that undermines the ABM Treaty.
NATIONAL MISSILE DEFENSE IS A POLITICAL BOMB TOSSING SESSION IN CONGRESS
DERRICK Z. JACKSON The Boston Globe March 26, 1999, SECTION: OP-ED; Pg. A23 HEADLINE: Star Wars politics // lnu-acs
On Capitol Hill there is no balance, no patience. Missile defense is nothing but a political bomb lobbed by the Republicans at the Democrats. The Democrats, instead of calling for an air raid drill for all of us to hear, are on their knees with their heads tucked down, writing blank checks for clueless programs. Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Raytheon, and the like are popping the champagne. They know that after the billions are spent, they will be lucky if they produce anything worth any more than a Civil Defense barrel of water and crackers.