Suchergebnisse

Comments on Charles Glaser's & Steve Fetter's "National Missile Defense and the Future of US Nuclear Weapons Policy." Although they offer much advice about how to deploy national missile defense (NMD), Glaser & Fetter tend to underestimate the potential importance of such systems. They brush over the possibility of deterrence failure, the coercive value of missiles in crises prior to war, & the difficulties involved in preemptive destruction of missiles. They argue correctly that the strategic costs of NMD could outweigh the benefits, but the basic logic of limited long-range missile defense is sound. In The Authors Reply, Glaser & Fetter state their agreement with many of Lindsay & O'Hanlon's points & broad policy conclusions, but disagree with their judgments about the probability of various scenarios & about how future leaders will value built missile defense systems. Differences in their evaluation of deterrence ability, rogue-state attacks, & preemption are discussed. M. Plfum