Dismiss the missile defense systems

It is a fairy tale of military-industrial proportions. Since the Cold War, when the Reagan administration first announced its Strategic Defense Initiative in 1983, the wet dream that is Star Wars still keeps people up at night.

This past month the Bush administration realized Reagan’s dream when it announced its intentions to go forth with the construction and implementation of a national missile defense program.

Those who advocate the program state that it will provide Americans with an umbrella of safety against short, medium and intercontinental ballistic missile launches. Its proponents hold that, while modest, the program is sufficient to protect us against accidental launches from nations like China and Russia and attacks from nations such as North Korea and Iraq. Those in favor argue that the need for such a defense program has never been so imperative, as the United States presently cannot defend itself from a single ballistic missile.

However, what the advocates of the program are keen to shy from is the simple fact that despite the will of the administration and the Pentagon, the technology is not yet ready.

In the most recent rounds of tests, the missile defense system worked only five out of eight times. Normally, such a system would never be implemented by a military that is usually sharp to shelve those tools in its arsenal that are not up to its high standards.

The New York Times quoted former Senate Armed Services Committee chairman Carl Levin as saying that “President Bush’s announcement … to deploy missile defense systems starting in 2004 violates common sense by determining to deploy systems before they have been tested and shown to work.”

In the international arena, such a system as the United States is preparing to implement is sure to do nothing more than de-stabilize already delicate relations with countries like Pakistan and North Korea, and will surely weaken our diplomatic influence with countries such as China and Russia. In fact, many close to and within the government say that such a system will only lead to a new age arms race, as countries like North Korea will try and bolster their reserves to overwhelm our piddly system. Instability and more nukes are not what our country or the world needs.

The Bush administration has admirably taken significant steps since Sept. 11 to shore up our nation’s homeland defense capabilities. However, any honest and legitimate assessment of our country’s present defense abilities would rightly state that we face a far greater threat from bio-terrorism, dirty bombs and other now “conventional” forms of terrorism. Basically, we ought to focus on planes, trains, boats and buses – the place to use our nation’s limited resources is not in the stratosphere, but on the ground.

In stating his intentions to go forth with the missile defense program, Bush has said that he will ask Congress to approve an additional $1.5 billion to help fund the fledgling idea.

Within the enormity and confusion that is our federal budget, a measly amount like the $1.5 billion that Bush has asked for is likely to go unnoticed. However, given Congress’ recent passing of the Homeland Defense and Security Act, I believe that we as a nation are better served spending our $1.5 billion elsewhere.

For example, we as a nation would be far more stable economically and strategically if the Bush administration instead announced that it is providing $1.5 billion worth of incentives to domestic auto manufacturers for them to take significant steps to reduce the fuel consumption of their vehicles. Such a move would have the long-term benefits of dramatically lessening our nation’s dependence on Middle Eastern oil reserves and the new technology spurred on by the project would only serve to bolster our sagging economy.

Or, the White House could do something even more novel than meddle with oil: It could invest in our nation’s beleaguered schools. $1.5 billion dollars flushed into the country’s public schools as monies allocated to recruit, hire and train new teachers, or to renovate and innovate our children’s classrooms, or as salary increases for deserving teachers would be a move that would provide for our nation’s future, by investing in it. For instance, $1.5 billion dollars could hire and train 15,000 new teachers and provide each state with $20 million dollars to feed into technology and new classroom infrastructures. Truly, this would be a worthwhile investment in our nation’s future.

Let’s close the book on this ballistic fairly tale for now. Let’s foster growth and stability with our international neighbors. Let’s allow Tom Ridge and his embryonic department to do what they do. And let’s use this $1.5 billion in a fashion that really adds up.