 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| . |  |
. |
ABM Treaty Ends, US Open To Experiment On Missile Defense
Washington (AFP) June 13, 2002 As the United States prepares to officially withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty Thursday, its military is proceeding with an ambitious program to create a system to shoot down incoming long-range missiles. The first step towards the Bush administration's new missile doctrine is set for Saturday, when Air Force General Ronald Kadish, head of the Missile Defense Agency, attends a ceremony to break ground on silos for six interceptor missiles at Fort Greely, Alaska. It is due to be completed by September 2004. It will be the first time in 30 years that there are no constraints on Washington's ability to test and deploy systems able to down long-range enemy missiles. US President George W. Bush gave notice in December, despite Russian objections, that the United States would unilaterally withdraw from the treaty signed in 1972 with the now-defunct Soviet Union forbidding such tests. While many have regarded the treaty as the cornerstone of arms control for nearly three decades, Bush has dismissed it as a "relic" of the Cold War. Bush, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, believes the United States is vulnerable to long-range missile attack coming from Iran, Iraq or North Korea, nations that Bush has dubbed the "Axis of Evil." According to the Pentagon, the Alaska missile site, which would have been prohibited under the ABM treaty, is mainly a "test bed" enabling the military to monitor tests in the Pacific. So far, the Pentagon has successfully shot down four "enemy" missiles in seven attempts. US critics of Bush's missile defense plans note the shield would have done nothing to stop the attacks of September 11 or thwart the detonation of a radioactive "dirty" bomb in a US city. Lawmakers, too, are unhappy that contractors developing the military defense system have been exempted by Rumsfeld from providing Congress with financial or technical details of their progress or upcoming tests. Philip Coyle, a senior Pentagon official under president Bill Clinton, wrote in the Washington Post Tuesday that the program would cost 70 billion dollars, and more than 200 billion "for the full, layered system planned by the Bush administration." The Pentagon "has made a decision that threatens to keep the American public and Congress in the dark" about the program's progress, he said. But Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy, countered in the conservative Washington Times that the ABM treaty was an "insuperable obstacle to developing and deploying effective protection against missile attack for the American people." Gaffney expressed pleasure that the treaty was "formally consigned to the dust-bin of history." But Bush's efforts could be stymied at the last minute. On Tuesday, 31 members of Congress filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging his authority to pull out of the treaty. The lawsuit filed in US District Court here argues that only Congress can abrogate international treaties, and accuses Bush of violating the US Constitution. Critics of Bush's decision to withdraw from the treaty have failed in both houses of Congress to bring a resolution opposing the move to a vote. "It is possible that a judge could order a delay," said Pam Bain, spokeswoman at the Missile Defense Agency. "We have no idea when he could take a decision." All rights reserved. � 2002 Agence France-Presse. Sections of the information displayed on this page (dispatches, photographs, logos) are protected by intellectual property rights owned by Agence France-Presse. As a consequence, you may not copy, reproduce, modify, transmit, publish, display or in any way commercially exploit any of the content of this section without the prior written consent of Agence France-Presse. Related Links SpaceDaily Search SpaceDaily Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express 
Nuclear-Tipped Foolishness
Washington - May 21, 2002On April 11, 2002, the Washington Post publicized the Defense Science Board's study of integrating nuclear-tipped interceptors into America's planned national missile defense (NMD). Initial Bush administration reviews of missile defense technology discounted the possibility of using such a system. However, the administration may be concerned that other missile defense proposals, employing "kinetic hit-to-kill vehicles" that strike a target head-on, cannot guarantee successful interception.
|
|
| |||||||||
| The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2016 - Space Media Network. All websites are published in Australia and are solely subject to Australian law and governed by Fair Use principals for news reporting and research purposes. AFP, UPI and IANS news wire stories are copyright Agence France-Presse, United Press International and Indo-Asia News Service. ESA news reports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additional copyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement, agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by Space Media Network on any Web page published or hosted by Space Media Network. Privacy Statement All images and articles appearing on Space Media Network have been edited or digitally altered in some way. Any requests to remove copyright material will be acted upon in a timely and appropriate manner. Any attempt to extort money from Space Media Network will be ignored and reported to Australian Law Enforcement Agencies as a potential case of financial fraud involving the use of a telephonic carriage device or postal service. |
