|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Bush shoots for stronger defenseTOPLINE: U.S. President George W. Bush is looking to mold nuclear strategy to his vision of strengthened defense -- including a global missile defense system and attempts to deter nuclear weapons technologies worldwide. IN CONTEXT: Bush stressed defense during the presidential campaign, portraying defense strategy as a key difference between him and candidate Vice President Al Gore. Specifics of the Bush nuclear strategy will likely come after more consultations with aides, congressmen and allies -- but he has outlined the general direction he wants to go. The president's thinking: Significant cuts in the U.S. nuclear arsenal
The United States is already committed to reducing the stockpile of 7,200 nuclear weapons to 3,500 under START II -- and between 2,000 and 2,500 further as a framework for START III talks. Russia has already proposed slashing the number of weapons to 1,500. Bush made it clear during his campaign that he wanted to reduce the nuclear arsenal while still maintaining a formidable deterrent. Slashing the number of bombing targets in Russia in the event of war and adding a small number of new targets in China Russia just isn't the power it once was, while the administration believes China is on the rise. The administration is also looking to shift what Bush aide Karen Hughes called the "nuclear balance of terror" that existed throughout the Cold War era. Increasing by as much as $7 billion research and development of strategic and theater ballistic missile defense systems. The thrust of Bush's nuclear strategy -- a move toward a national missile defense system, a proposal banned by the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty. Bush considers the treaty outdated and wants to scrap it. The talk in the White House is over how and how fast. European allies worry such a system will leave them more vulnerable, both because it could signal a lesser U.S. commitment to European defense and because it could heighten tensions between the United States and China and the United States and Russia. Heightened tensions in those arenas could mean a renewed arms race if both Russia and China feel pressure to keep up. And if China builds up a nuclear arsenal, defense analysts say, India and Pakistan are sure to follow. Bush said during the campaign that he wanted a defense that protected both the United States and its friends and wants input from the allies. He has made calls to German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, French President Jacques Chirac, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and NATO Secretary-General George Robertson for suggestions. Some, Schroeder in particular, are said to be warming to Bush's ideas. High level meetings will bring more of Bush's ideas to the table with an aim to easing fears and drawing in support. Administration officials, however, have made it clear neither Russia nor the allies get a veto. The president has not yet spoken with Russian President Vladimir Putin, but administration officials have made it clear neither Russia nor the allies get a veto. Adding sea-based and space-based systems to the land-based plan already in testing under the Clinton administration The threat is different, the administration says. No longer is the greatest threat to the security of the United States coming from the Soviet Union, which no long exists, but from so-called "rogue" states like Iraq, Iran and North Korea. Bush's defense plans gel with that idea chief in mind. Rather than defend against a full nuclear attack, the Bush strategy would defend against small-scale attacks -- or even accidental launches of nuclear weapons. Russia, China and many of the European allies, however, consider the threat overblown. Critics inside the United States agree with that assessment, saying that so-called "rogue" states are more likely to send a bomb in a suitcase or launch a single missile from offshore -- and anti-nuclear opponents oppose the whole thing on principle. Still others say a missile shield is impractical and would not be technologically capable of stopping every missile launched against the United States. And such talk may also be premature. By most estimates, such a shield is a minimum of five years away. RELATED STORIES:
Bush to deliver address on national missile defense (April 27, 2001) RELATED SITES:
The White House |
ALLPOLITICS
Lieberman to announce U.S. terror task force to nearly double in size FBI lawyer at center of 9/11 flap wins White House award Democrats question GOP choice for budget post GOP moves to finish spending bills Vermont lawmakers pick governor (MORE)
TOP STORIES
N. Y. plans to heal skyline Stocks rise on Case departure Lieberman's presidential announcement today New arrests may be linked to UK ricin scare (MORE)
SPORTS
Jordan says farewell for the third time Shaq could miss playoff game for child's birth Ex-USOC official says athletes bent drug rules (MORE)
All Scoreboards |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Back to the top |
© 2003 Cable News Network LP, LLLP.
A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. |