Discussion Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Beyond the ABM Treaty: A Plea For a Limited National Missile Defense System
Introduction
With approval rates higher than ever thanks to the war against terrorism, President George W. Bush finally did in December 2001 what he had threatened to do on different occasions but what many others thought - or hoped - was only bluff: withdrawing unilaterally from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. Regardless of the rationale or emotions behind or against this decision, it ended a period of uncertainty. Although in principle the Bush administration can still change its mind until June 2002 when the six months withdrawal period expires, most observers believe that this will not happen. Indeed, there are already plans on the table to start building a new test site at Fort Greely in Alaska in the Summer of 2002 that from 2004 onwards could be used as a base for a small ground-based mid-course National Missile Defense (NMD) launch site if needed.
Another advantage of this drastic decision is that it forces other nuclear weapons states to reconsider their existing arms control and nonproliferation policies. This study seeks to establish new limits to both offensive and defensive strategic weapons and aims to set limits to the deployment of NMD. Without such limits, the strategic balance between the major powers in the world - the United States (and its allies), Russia and China - might be in danger.
For more information on this publication:
Please contact
International Security
For Academic Citation:
Sauer, Tom. “Beyond the ABM Treaty: A Plea For a Limited National Missile Defense System.” Discussion Paper, 2002-03, Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School, February 28, 2002.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Journal Article
- Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Stopping Power of Norms: Saturation Bombing, Civilian Immunity, and U.S. Attitudes toward the Laws of War
Analysis & Opinions
- Quincy Institute For Responsible Statecraft
A US Nuclear Weapons Surge in 2021 Would Have No Strategic Value
Journal Article
- CSS Policy Perspectives
Arms Control: For and By Europe
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief
- Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper
- Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy
Introduction
With approval rates higher than ever thanks to the war against terrorism, President George W. Bush finally did in December 2001 what he had threatened to do on different occasions but what many others thought - or hoped - was only bluff: withdrawing unilaterally from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty. Regardless of the rationale or emotions behind or against this decision, it ended a period of uncertainty. Although in principle the Bush administration can still change its mind until June 2002 when the six months withdrawal period expires, most observers believe that this will not happen. Indeed, there are already plans on the table to start building a new test site at Fort Greely in Alaska in the Summer of 2002 that from 2004 onwards could be used as a base for a small ground-based mid-course National Missile Defense (NMD) launch site if needed.
Another advantage of this drastic decision is that it forces other nuclear weapons states to reconsider their existing arms control and nonproliferation policies. This study seeks to establish new limits to both offensive and defensive strategic weapons and aims to set limits to the deployment of NMD. Without such limits, the strategic balance between the major powers in the world - the United States (and its allies), Russia and China - might be in danger.
- Recommended
- In the Spotlight
- Most Viewed
Recommended
Journal Article - Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Stopping Power of Norms: Saturation Bombing, Civilian Immunity, and U.S. Attitudes toward the Laws of War
Analysis & Opinions - Quincy Institute For Responsible Statecraft
A US Nuclear Weapons Surge in 2021 Would Have No Strategic Value
Journal Article - CSS Policy Perspectives
Arms Control: For and By Europe
In the Spotlight
Most Viewed
Policy Brief - Quarterly Journal: International Security
The Future of U.S. Nuclear Policy: The Case for No First Use
Discussion Paper - Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard Kennedy School
Why the United States Should Spread Democracy


