1 - 7 of 7
Number of results to display per page
Search Results
2. Missile Defense: Defending America or Building Empire?
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 05-2003
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- The rationale for missile defense put forward by its advocates is often a “doom and gloom” picture: America and its citizens are defenseless against the threat of ballistic missiles, and missile defense is supposed to protect the American people. The administration's vision of missile defense is not just a global system that protects the United States against long-range missiles but a global system capable of engaging all classes of ballistic missiles to protect U.S. forces deployed worldwide, U.S. allies, and other friendly countries. Thus, the purpose of missile defense is extended well beyond protecting America and Americans.
- Topic:
- Foreign Policy, Defense Policy, and Nuclear Weapons
- Political Geography:
- United States and America
3. Should the United States "Weaponize" Space?
- Author:
- Edward Hudgins and Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 03-2002
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Control of space is at the crux of the debate about the future of U.S. military space policy. The question is not about militarizing space. Clearly, we have been using and will continue to use space for military purposes. But, whereas we are currently using space assets to support terrestrial (ground, sea, and air) military operations, what Sen. Robert C. Smith (R-N.H.), the Space Commission (which was chaired by current Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld), and others have proposed is that the United States move toward “weaponizing” space for space control.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, International Cooperation, and Science and Technology
- Political Geography:
- United States
4. From the Sea: National Missile Defense Is Neither Cheap Nor Easy
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 06-2000
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Sea-based missile defense is being advocated as an alternative to the Clinton administration's limited land-based national missile defense (NMD), which is in the early stages of testing. Proponents of sea-based NMD (which is only a concept, not a program) argue that such a system can be deployed more quickly and will be less expensive than the Clinton administration's land-based system. Some argue that the Navy Theater Wide (NTW) system—which is being designed to provide midcourse intercept capability against slower, shorter-range theater ballistic missiles—can be upgraded to attack longrange intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in their boost phase (when under powered flight at the beginning of their trajectories). Interestingly enough, advocates of sea-based NMD include not only traditional supporters of missile defense but also people who were previously opposed to missile defense.
- Topic:
- Security, Defense Policy, Politics, and Terrorism
5. From the Sea: National Missile Defense Is Neither Cheap Nor Easy
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 09-2000
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Sea-based missile defense is being advocated as an alternative to the Clinton administration\'s limited land-based national missile defense (NMD), which is in the early stages of testing. Proponents of sea-based NMD (which is only a concept, not a program) argue that such a system can be deployed more quickly and will be less expensive than the Clinton administration\'s land-based system. Some argue that the Navy Theater Wide (NTW) system—which is being designed to provide midcourse intercept capability against slower, shorter-range theater ballistic missiles—can be upgraded to attack longrange intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) in their boost phase (when under powered flight at the beginning of their trajectories). Interestingly enough, advocates of sea-based NMD include not only traditional supporters of missile defense but also people who were previously opposed to missile defense.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy
- Political Geography:
- United States
6. Arms Control and Missile Defense: Not Mutually Exclusive
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña
- Publication Date:
- 07-2000
- Content Type:
- Policy Brief
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- Traditionally, strategic offensive arms control and ballistic missile defense have been viewed as mutually exclusive. During the Cold War, the general belief was that anti–ballistic missile (ABM) systems would call into question the ability of the superpowers to successfully survive a first nuclear strike and inflict sufficient damage with a second strike. That is, missile defense could allow one superpower to launch a first strike and then use its defenses to intercept a second strike with the other superpower's surviving warheads—thereby undermining deterrence and stability. Furthermore, the thinking was that this situation would result in a dangerous offensive arms race as each side sought to counter the effects of the other's defenses.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy, Arms Control and Proliferation, and Nuclear Weapons
- Political Geography:
- Russia, United States, Europe, and Asia
7. National Missile Defense: Examining the Options
- Author:
- Charles V. Peña and Barbara Conry
- Publication Date:
- 03-1999
- Content Type:
- Working Paper
- Institution:
- The Cato Institute
- Abstract:
- To date, the debate surrounding national missile defense (NMD) has been dominated by political rhetoric. Supporters (usually conservatives) often paint a “doom-and-gloom” picture, pointing out that the United States is vulnerable to an attack by ballistic missiles. Critics (usually liberals) defend the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty as the cornerstone of deterrence and stability and argue that any defensive deployment would upset the balance between the offensive strategic nuclear forces of the United States and Russia.
- Topic:
- Defense Policy
- Political Geography:
- Russia and United States