MD Treats Symptom, Not Cause

After listening to yesterday’s speakers, I was struck by the fact that there was no mention of the possibility of trying to reduce nuclear weapons and move in a direction that eliminates the use of them as both weapons and negotiating tools or “bargaining chips.”

Given the situations in North Korea and Iran, such a view may seem foolish or naïve to some, and it would be a very distant vision. But when we’re talking about perpetuating a system that could actually lead to the destruction of mankind, it concerns me that our only options seem to be building more weapons, or focusing on more defense systems that may or may not deter other countries from attacking us.

James Carafano said that developing a “robust” missile defense system would keep us safe because other countries would realize that they could not keep up and would therefore know not to attack the United States. But what if the opposite is true? Certainly it might take them years to come up with the capability to outdo the United States or to get past our missile defense system, but that does not mean they are simply going to let the idea go.

Obviously there needs to be some caution, and the U.S. should not give up and leave itself defenseless while places like North Korea and Iran further develop their nuclear capabilities. President Reagan and President Obama declared themselves committed toward working for a nuclear-free world, but pledged to do so while still protecting Americans from potential threats. It will be interesting to see how Obama intends to do this, and what his stance will ultimately be on missile defense.

We’ve heard that the Iranian government and people are unified behind their country’s nuclear program, and that it is unlikely that they will abandon it on any account. A country that wants to be a major world power has a definite interested in developing nuclear capabilities because it forces other nations to take them seriously. But if there was a concerted effort to remove nuclear weaponry from the equation, there wouldn’t be a need for them as bargaining chips, and perhaps we could eliminate threats in a less violent, more peaceful way.

Maybe it won’t ever happen, and it’s not likely to happen anywhere in the near future, but it seems that while we are concerning ourselves with developing missile defense and nuclear capabilities, it is in the interest of everyone to work toward more humane means of negotiation and diplomacy. It’s difficult to imagine that a world that sees more and more nuclear weapons and threats would not be more dangerous and oppressive than one that is stable and free.