Author: Charles V. Peña / Topic: Security

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

Author:: Charles V. Peña
Publication Date:: 12-2001
Content Type:: Policy Brief
Institution:: The Cato Institute
Abstract:: To prosecute the war on terrorism, President Bush has assembled a diverse coalition of countries for political, diplomatic, and military support. Some of those countries are long-standing friends and allies of the United States. Others have new or changing relationships with the United States. Although there may be a price for their support, America should not pay an excessive price—one that could be detrimental to longer-term U.S. national security interests. And though it may be necessary to provide a certain amount of immediate aid (directly or indirectly) as a quid pro quo for the support of other nations in our war on terrorism, the United States needs to avoid longer-term entanglements, openended commitments, and the potential for an extreme anti-American backlash.
Topic:: Security, Religion, and Terrorism
Political Geography:: Russia, United States, America, Europe, Middle East, and Asia

Author:: Charles V. Peña
Publication Date:: 12-2001
Content Type:: Working Paper
Institution:: The Cato Institute
Abstract:: To prosecute the war on terrorism, President Bush has assembled a diverse coalition of countries for political, diplomatic, and military support. Some of those countries are long-standing friends and allies of the United States. Others have new or changing relationships with the United States. Although there may be a price for their support, America should not pay an excessive price—one that could be detrimental to longer-term U.S. national security interests. And though it may be necessary to provide a certain amount of immediate aid (directly or indirectly) as a quid pro quo for the support of other nations in our war on terrorism, the United States needs to avoid longer-term entanglements, open-ended commitments, and the potential for an extreme anti-American backlash.
Topic:: Security, Religion, and Terrorism
Political Geography:: Russia, United States, America, Europe, Middle East, and Asia

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

Refine your search