• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month
  1. 1
  2. 2
  3. 3
  4. 4
  5. 5
  6. 6
  7. 7
  8. 8
  9. 9
  10. 10

Should George Bush Press Ahead with his Plans for National Missile Defence?

Extracts from this document...


Should George Bush Press Ahead with his Plans for National Missile Defence? When, on the 11th September 2001, the USA was struck by the worst single act of terrorism of all time, many thought a shift of foreign policy adopted by the sole superpower was imminent. Indeed, for a short time, the USA focussed on finding and 'bringing to justice' the terrorist organisation Al Q'aida. Yet shortly after this, connections were made between the terrorists and certain nation states, which had been long time foes, or at least not allies, of the USA. This is shown clearly by George W. Bush's 'State of the Union' address in 2001, in which he identifies an "Axis of Evil"1 of Iraq, Iran and North Korea. From this, it can be seen that the USA perceives its primary adversaries as not the old rivals of the USSR and China, but of smaller, 'rogue' states. Given the extent to which weapons of mass destruction (WMD) are spread over the globe and that the means of delivering them, notably Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM), seem more widely available than ever, it is no wonder that the debate over National Missile Defence (NMD) has once again been brought to the fore. The basic theory of George W. Bush's plans for NMD is that a number of sensors placed around the globe could detect a launch of a missile. These may be land, sea or space-based, and allow for 'interceptors', also at various points, to be deployed to strike the missile, destroying it. ...read more.


This resulted in both sides having more than enough nuclear weapons to totally obliterate the other many times over. Added to this the fact than a strike by either would still allow the other to respond by launching its own missiles, created a situation of 'mutually assured destruction' (MAD)12. This is the basic principle of deterrence, that no one state would launch missiles at another state with comparable capability, as this would result in both sides being destroyed. This situation during the 'Cold War' was locked in by the signing of treaties. The most relevant of these is the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty of 1972, to the extent that President Clinton called the treaty, "a cornerstone of stability"13. This act forbade either the USA or USSR from developing defensive systems to counter a missile attack. The logic being that if, for example, the USSR could defend itself from a counter-strike by the USA, thus throwing MAD out of the window, it would be more likely to attack the USA first. This principle is what many credit for the prevention of a third world war between the superpowers. 'Deterrence theory' dominated the thinking of USA foreign policy so much, that even after the end of the 'Cold War' it was still held by many to be the best option, "Deterrence worked throughout the cold war, it continues to work now, it will work well into the future"14. Yet this is not the case. Deterrence did work in the 'Cold War', but that was a specific situation and it does not necessarily follow that the same applies to a post-Cold War era. ...read more.


The potential threat from 'rogue' states, as acknowledged by most experts in the field, is a serious one and will only gain in severity over time. It has also been shown that, while previous plans for a form of NMD or SDI were unavailable due to the constraints of the ABM Treaty (1972), they were also held back by the costs involved. These costs have diminished since the end of the Cold War, and thus not only is NMD still a viable course of action, it is now more practicable then ever before. This piece has also attempted to show how the policies of the superpowers during the Cold War, namely deterrence, are no longer applicable to current security concerns. That the threat posed by 'rogue' states does not conform to the situations that allow deterrence to be successful. The USA will continue to act, or desire to act, in many regions of the world; this can be seen clearly. Given this, it has been shown how the need for NMD is crucial for the USA to retain its ability to do so, without threatening the lives of its citizens at home. Finally, it has been seen how one of the key arguments against NMD; that it will increase weapons proliferation, is inadequate. Proliferation existed throughout the Cold War and has accelerated since its end. The deployment of NMD will not stop proliferation of weapons, but neither will the status quo. Therefore for the reasons given, it can be seen why George Bush is right to press ahead with a National Missile Defence initiative. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE International relations 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 GCSE International relations 1945-1991 essays

  1. Was the Cuban Missile Crisis a turning point in Relations between the Superpowers?

    After the missile crisis on Cuba the United States and Soviet Union, realized just how dangerous the situation they were in with their nuclear arsenals was. This in its self was a turning point in their relations and mentality, the steps they were to take after the crisis would hopefully ensure another nuclear weapons crisis would never take place.

  2. How did the Red scare and McCarthyism become such a dominant force in the ...

    Senator Millard Tydings challenged his wild allegations, but McCarthy simply denied any allegations and accused Tydings of being a Communist. This lead to Tydings losing his seat in the 1954 elections, to Republican. Politicians had realised the voting potential of McCarthy, and none dared challenge him, in fear of losing votes.

  1. The Cuban Missile Crisis: Was President Kennedy the Saviour of the Cuban Missile Crisis?

    However, this would cause a conflict with the USSR instead of Cuba and the USSR might do the same to West Berlin * An air attack against all military sites in Cuba could be carried out therefore destroying missiles and sites already in Cuba but there would be a direct

  2. Cuban Missile Crisis Sources Questions

    That left Kennedy with diplomacy, a blockade or doing nothing. Choosing diplomacy would mean months of talks and would take far too long. Choosing to do nothing would give the Soviets more time to build up their bases and increase the threat of nuclear strike from Cuban soil.

  1. " Individuals do not 'shape' historical events; the best they can do is to ...

    impressive 20th century figure, we are able to gain a new appreciation of his qualities. The figure of Che Guevara is much too large to pigeonhole as a relic of the 1960s. However there are many different views and opinions on Che Guevara throughout the historical world.

  2. Edexcel Cold War 1943-1991 Revision (Detailed)

    The creation of the 1945 Atom bomb (1948 SU Atom bomb) and 1953 H-Bomb was a massive step for society. Warsaw Pact The warsaw pact itself wasn?t important. It increased tensions and rivalled Nato but was fairly inaccurate. If anything, it was self-distructive when Nagy tried to leave it.

  1. Cold War Summary, quotes and revision notes.

    of political leaders and Olympians - Backward economy with no profit motive Superpowers: 1945 - Bipolar World = Both USA & USSR militarily and economically powerful = global influence. Most other nations allied to one or other power, linked as allies or trading partners.

  2. How important was the nuclear arms race in the development of tensions during the ...

    to appear weak and so he decided to place a naval blockade around Cuba. This significantly heated tensions as the possibility of nuclear attack was at a new level and the nations were close to a war.

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