DATE=9/6/2000
TYPE=U-S OPINION ROUNDUP
TITLE=PRESIDENT CLINTON DEFERS MISSILE DEFENSE SYSTEM
NUMBER=6-11988
BYLINE=ANDREW GUTHRIE
DATELINE=WASHINGTON
EDITOR=ASSIGNMENTS
TELEPHONE=619-3335
INTERNET=YES
CONTENT=
INTRO: When Ronald Reagan was president and the
Soviet Union still posed a threat to the United States
with is robust nuclear missile arsenal, a missile-
defense was proposed. The system involved building a
complex shield of anti-missile missiles, lasers, and
radars, to protect the United States from incoming
enemy missiles. Millions of dollars was spent on
research, but the controversial system was never
built.
Now it has resurfaced on a much smaller scale and a
somewhat revised purpose. It's called the National
Missile Defense (N-M-D) system, and again is the
subject of considerable controversy.
We get a sampling of comment on the latest step in
this controversy now from __________ in today's U-S
Opinion Roundup.
TEXT: This latest version of a nuclear-missile shield
for the United States leapt to the forefront of debate
in 1998 after a government commission reported that
within a few years, Iran and North Korea could
conceivably develop long-range nuclear missiles that
could hit the United States.
[ED'S: North Korea's never-tested Taepo Dong Two
missile has a potential range of five-thousand-954-
kilometers, a range that would include Hawaii and
parts of Alaska.]
Congress reacted by suggesting a smaller, anti-nuclear
missile program to protect against such potentially
limited rogue attacks.
Last week, President Clinton decided to defer the
decision on building the system to the next president.
Editorial opinion has been almost uniformly positive,
even from those papers that favor building the system.
We begin our sampling in Ohio, where The Akron Beacon
Journal agrees with the decision, and also praises the
political maneuvering that took the president there.
VOICE: Bill Clinton adeptly played the politics
of missile defense. He then made the right
decision postponing deployment. ... He completed
two-years of shrewd triangulating last week,
announcing that he would leave the decision ...
to his successor. [Mr.] Clinton has long been
ambivalent about a missile defense, the prospect
of using missiles to destroy missiles launched,
say, by terrorists or rogue nations. He has
questioned whether the country would enhance its
security enough to justify the cost. In 1998,
he felt political pressure [from the] Rumsfeld
... Commission ... [However] ... all along, he
had made his support conditional. The
technology would have to be proven. Allies
would have to approve. A compromise with Russia
would have to be found. Moscow and Washington
both agreed in the 1972 Antiballistic Missile
Treaty that national missile defenses would
upset the balance of deterrence, making a first
strike with nuclear weapons more likely. ... On
Friday, the president walked through the exit...
he had preserved.
TEXT: The Washington Times is upset however, noting
that President Clinton's decision is putting Americans
at unnecessary risk.
VOICE: To its list of missed opportunities, the
Clinton-Gore administration can now add the
abdication of responsibility for national
security. ... President Clinton announced that
he would not authorize the deployment of a
national missile defense system) N-M-D). Mr.
Clinton made his decision even as he
acknowledged that the threat of ballistic-
missile attack from nations like Iraq, Iran, and
North Korea is "real and growing." ... By
deciding not to begin construction of the
Alaskan radar, Mr. Clinton has indisputably
delayed eventual deployment beyond two-thousand-
five, when North Korea is estimated to be
capable of launching an inter-continental
missile against the United States.
TEXT: On the other hand, The Los Angeles Times calls
it: "[A] Wise Decision on Missile Defense."
VOICE: [President] Clinton did the right thing
in deferring a decision... His successor will
do the right thing if he insists on proof ...
the system will work before considering
deployment at a projected cost of 60-billion-
dollars. That means realistic tests under real-
world conditions, something the Pentagon is
still a long way from providing.
TEXT: In Hawaii, potentially under the threat from a
still untested, but long-range North Korean missile,
The Honolulu Star Bulletin adds: "The decision is
justified because problems remain to be worked out
before the system can be considered effective."
Even The Free Press in Chattanooga, Tennessee, which
feels the nation needs to build and deploy a missile
defense system against attack from so-called rogue
nations like Iraq, Iran and North Korea, says of the
President's move:
VOICE: ... it is difficult to fault Mr. Clinton
for his no-decision delay because it would not
be smart to deploy an inadequate system
prematurely.
TEXT: The [Trenton, New Jersey] Times, San Antonio
[Texas] Express-News, and the Chicago Tribune are all
calling it "the right" decision as well. Here are
some of the Tribune's thoughts.
VOICE: This leaves the tough decision on
deployment of a 60-billion-dollar anti-missile
system to [Mr.] Clinton's successor, and that is
where it belongs. Governor George Bush and Vice
President Al Gore ought to use this as an
opportunity to engage in a spirited, substantive
debate on the issue. It is unfortunate that
[Governor] Bush, instead, has taken this as an
opportunity to attack the Clinton administration
as weak on defense.
TEXT: For the view from part of Texas, The San
Antonio Express-News adds:
VOICE: [Mr.] Clinton ordered the Pentagon to
continue testing the technology for the proposed
missile defense system and punted the decision
to the next president. That is where it
belongs. So far, tests have produced mostly
negative results, raising questions about the
practicality of spending billions of dollars on
the plan. Even if a missile system is
eventually deployed, [President] Clinton's
action gives U-S officials a better chance of
avoiding wasteful spending. Approving a system
that will cost 60-billion dollars or more
without solid evidence of its effectiveness
would be fiscal folly.
TEXT: On that note from one of the largest papers in
Texas, we conclude this sampling of U-S editorial
comment on a decision to delay construction of an
anti-nuclear missile defensive system.
NEB/ANG/RAE
06-Sep-2000 13:52 PM EDT (06-Sep-2000 1752 UTC)
NNNN
Source: Voice of America
.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
