• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

"Would the deployment of a National Missile Defence System destabilise the international system, or should it be pursued?"

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

IP 36620 - Strategy in the Nuclear Age Coursework Essay: "Would the Deployment of a National Missile Defence System Destabilise the International System, or Should it Be Pursued?" (1,627 Words) Pages: 10 Student Number: 010800186 Contents Page 1 - Contents Page 2 - Abstract Page 3-8 - Would the Deployment of a National Missile Defence System Destabilise the International System, or Should it Be Pursued? Page 9 - Bibliography Abstract This essay argues that the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty is a relic of the Cold War, unsuited to the geo-political realities of today. The introduction of a National Missile Defence system would not destabilise the international system; East-West relations have moved beyond what they were in 1972, the modern threat is very different to what it was in the Cold War, and the logic of Mutually Assured Destruction can not safeguard against contemporary dangers to Western Security. Would the Deployment of a National Missile Defence System Destabilise the International System, or Should it Be Pursued? The debate about National Missile Defence (NMD) centres on the significance or irrelevance of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABMT) between the United States and the Soviet Union, which restricted the deployment of continent-wide defences against ballistic missiles1. The ABMT was negotiated at a time of the Cold War when the introduction of a defence system into nuclear relations would almost certainly have antagonised the arms race. ...read more.

Middle

This, critics argue, could re-ignite the arms race, as the US attempt to abandon the ABMT would be perceived as an antagonistic act whose sole aim (it would be perceived) would be to emphasise US power and its supremacy over Russia7. Therefore, the ABMT may have been negotiated in 1972, but it's meaning and symbolism remain as relevant today as it did throughout the Cold War. NMD's critics are also quick to contend that no rogue state is even close to posing a credible threat in the foreseeable future8. Critics also argue that the threat that nuclear-capable rogue states pose is at most, regional. The introduction of an NMD system would therefore at best achieve very little, or at worst would motivate such rogue states/terrorist groups to develop/obtain nuclear capabilities before the deployment of an effective NMD system. The final argument that critics of NMD advance is much more strategic in character. NMD, it is claimed, may be capable of defending against a long-range intercontinental attack, but would simply be unable to protect the US from a limited nuclear attack. It would, consequently, be logical for any potentially hostile adversary to attack with a submarine (or other similar attacking capability) off a near coast of the US. Even if the NMD system managed to intercept the missile - which would be unlikely - the nuclear fallout and subsequent radiation would be so catastrophic as to render the interception irrelevant. ...read more.

Conclusion

Highlighting what NMD can not defend against as a reason not to deploy it forsakes all that it can defend against. Critics of NMD fail to present any other national security option that would defend against accidental launch or a deliberate attack from a rogue state/terrorist group. All possible threats must be encountered for in national security policy. The introduction of a NMD system would not be destabilising. The contemporary geo-political realities are different to those of 1972, when the ABMT was negotiated, and those negotiating could envisage this development, as an opt-out clause was included in the treaty. Russia's relationship has moved way beyond what it was throughout the Cold War; the East and West are no longer locked in a deterrence relationship. The current economic difficulties experienced by Russia dictate that it would be unable to enter into an arms race even if it wanted to, and these difficulties show no sign of disappearing in the foreseeable future11. The democratically-elected US political elite has been elected to provide security for its citizens against all possible threats. Whilst NMD may not be able to account for all of the nuclear attacks that the US may potentially face, it can play a very specific part in the security of the US. The current system fails to provide security against the threats highlighted throughout this essay and it would be unacceptable not to count for all eventualities. NMD should therefore be deployed and play its specific and essential role in the security of the US. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level International History, 1945-1991 essays

  1. Post-Cold War Realities

    Iran is now stronger and more powerful than its new neighbours and no longer vulnerable to conventional intimidation or threats from that direction. A result of the fact that it is now an autonomous middle power, capable of permeating the power vacuum in predominantly Islamic central Asia and the Caucasus,

  2. Missile Defence

    Bush's predecessor Clinton deferred from the national missile defense due to the fact the technology was not available or tested at various levels. Clinton was against the missile shied due to several reasons: the system not technologically possible, had failed on numerous tests; it could be easily foiled by decoys

  1. International Relations Assess the arguments for and against the proliferation of nuclear weapons

    countries which hold them will never actually use them against one another because if they do they are assured destruction. In addition to the above, there are those who argue for 'selective' nuclear proliferation throughout countries who face nuclear armed opponents.

  2. September 11th

    The US has over 40,000 troop based there and Kuwait is the US's main Arabic supporter for an invasion of Iraq. Turkey would be a key launch pad for am invasion as it borders a large area to the north of Iraq.

  1. Why did the superpowers find it possible to reduce their nuclear arsenals in the ...

    Furthermore, as A.J.C Edwards pointed out, "Even if the political will had been there on both sides to make major concessions, the crucial problems of verification and enforcement remained intractable, especially as the Soviets were equivocal about on-site inspection2". Mutual distrust between both states remained too profound for both parties

  2. History of the United States

    George Washington was unanimously elected to be chief executive, the only president so honored. He was inaugurated in the temporary capital, New York City, on Apr. 30, 1789. The American experiment in republican self-government now began again. The unanimity expressed in Washington's election would prove short- lived.

  1. What was 'dtente' between the superpowers and why did it fail?

    Domestically, both sides reaped the awards of their efforts between 1971 and 1973. After being able to declare that peace was at hand in Vietnam (an issue which had so troubled the U.S.) and aided by the warming of the American people to the prospect of the Cold War coming

  2. The aim of this essay is to evaluate if the end of the Cold ...

    The divide was further created when the US bombed Japan in August 1945 which raised the mistrust between the two super powers and marked the beginning of the arms race. The hopes following the end of the World War II to replace the anarchy in the international system was instead filled with antagonism between Communism(the East)

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work