The debate on missile defense in the United States is sorely lacking in substance and has been overly politicized, especially recently given the hyper-partisan relationship between Congressional Republicans and President Obama. There is little discussion on the actual capabilities of current missile defense systems and the projected capabilities of future ones. We also haven’t paid enough attention to how others will react to a new strategic environment in which the United States has robust missile defense capabilities (or is perceived to).
New Analysis on Missile Defense Funding
Ploughshares Fund Senior Analyst Benjamin Loehrke has published a piece on missile defense on our website titled “Missile Defense Spending is Going to Stagnate.”
Update on Y-12 Security Problems
On Monday, NoH wrote about a security breach at the Y-12 nuclear production facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee. It turns out that was not the end of the story. Responding to the breach, the contractor in charge of the Y-12 site, Babcock and Wilcox Y-12, has ordered a week long “security stand-down,” which will stop all production work at the facility. During the stand down, all special nuclear material will be placed into vaults or vault-type facilities.
More Negative Consequences of Missile Defense
An interesting article by Dr. Hui Zhang in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists points out that U.S. missile defense could lead to an unintended consequence—a decision by China to build more nuclear weapons.
“The Failures of Missile Defense”
Center Senior Science Fellow Phil Coyle published an op-ed in the National Interest on July 26 on the scientific and technical basis of US missile defense programs, specifically the ground based midcourse defense (GMD) system (i.e. national missile defense) and the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA).
