Print

Mail

wiki links

TMD and NMD aren't the answer

Since US President George W. Bush announced that he would develop the controversial Na-tional Missile Defense (NMD) program, opposition has been voiced both in the US and other countries. Joseph Biden, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and Carl Levin, chairman of the Armed Services Committee, continue to hold reservations about NMD. China, Russia and both North and South Korea have all criticized the plan. Japan's foreign minister, Makiko Tanaka, is also skeptical. Furthermore, in a bid to counterbalance NMD, Russia announced its plan to establish space-based weapons systems starting June 1. China is also expected to make an all-out effort to develop space technology. Outer space is in danger of becoming filled with mankind's weapons.

Both NMD and the Theater Missile Defense (TMD) program are part of a proposed US missile defense system. The concept is to develop new missiles to destroy attacking ballistic missiles in the atmosphere, as well as a low-altitude missile system to intercept any missiles that slip through the high-altitude interception net. Even if this system is successfully developed, it may not be able to intercept all of the missiles fired in a war. Moreover, if the US decides to develop NMD, it must unilaterally abandon the Antiballistic Missile Treaty signed with Moscow in 1972. If a superpower such as the US fails to respect international law and breaches treaty obligations, it will have a negative influence on international norms and institutions.

NMD clearly differentiates between friends and foes. Those nations that deploy NMD are allies, while those that don't are enemies. Based on such logic, the world will once again sink into the mire of a cold war, leading to polarized confrontation.

Once the US deploys NMD, the number of Chinese long-range nuclear missiles is expected to increase from around 20 or so to between 200 and 250. China and Russia are deeply suspicious of NMD. The suspicion will create a "security dilemma" between the great powers, possibly leading to an arms race and generally bring about additional anxieties and dangers. NMD may also be a lot more than a defensive weapon. This is because once such defensive shields are invented, rivals may be provoked into developing even more effective means to counterattack. It is therefore questionable whether NMD can really bring peace and security.

As the only superpower in the post-Cold War era, the US faces the greatest risk of being attacked by guided missiles. It is understandable that the US believes that it requires a defense system to avoid attacks by biochemical and nuclear weapons. While Bush's "missile defense" diplomatic offensive was designed to pursue the US national interest, by not involving close cooperation with the international community it has undermined that objective. The US has made the decision to develop its missile system based on its own interest rather than on the international community's needs and opinions concerning international security and peace.

The Bush administration has decided to gradually reduce the number of nuclear weapons to a certain level in step with the development of NMD. But, as long as nuclear weapons exist, the prospect of "mutually assured destruction" continues to threaten the world. The US has to understand that the only means of avoiding biochemical and nuclear weapons is not NMD, but the complete dismantlement of such weapons. If it is willing to cooperate with other nations to prevent the proliferation of nuclear weapons and to cut down on the number of nuclear armaments, it should be able to achieve constructive results by virtue of its enormous influence. When people can discard the myth that "military force guarantees security" and refuse to resort to violence, world peace will no longer be an illusory dream.

The NMD program is aimed at defending the US and its allies. Taiwan should be the best candidate for participation in the TMD system, a branch of NMD. But China's strong warning has left Taiwan sandwiched between the US and China -- and thus it is caught in a dilemma.

If Taiwan decides to join TMD, China will definitely regard Taiwan as part of the US frontline defense against China. Although Taiwan will enjoy guaranteed defensive ability, the gap -- and the animosity -- between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait will be widened. In addition, the vast sum of money needed to establish a missile defense system will seriously undermine Taiwan's economic development and social welfare. A survey by the Mainland Affairs Council shows that support in Taiwan for the TMD is primarily a response to Chinese threats. If China removes Chinese missiles targeting Taiwan, the people of Taiwan will certainly refuse to spend so much as a cent on TMD.

All the governments in the world should renounce the use of force to intimidate other nations and endeavor to abolish destructive weapons and reduce armaments. Furthermore, since legitimacy for the use of military force comes from public support, the promotion of peace education could fundamentally alter people's misconceptions about military weapons. Civilian groups and non-governmental organizations can cooperate to support governments, monitor national defense budgets, and appeal to governments to reduce the procurement and export of military weapons, and urge the governments to peacefully hold negotiations among themselves.

The two sides of the Taiwan Strait should make efforts to remove animosity, renounce the use of force to resolve the cross-strait issue, negotiate with each other rationally and peacefully, and reduce armaments on the basis of mutual trust and benefit. This way, both sides can avoid war and use the vast sums of money saved every year to boost Taiwan's economy and help China resolve educational and medical problems in impoverished areas.

The two governments should put the money currently appropriated for military budgets into the improvement of economic development, public infrastructure, medical treatment, education and social welfare. Their different political and social systems should peacefully compete with each other, and they should dedicate themselves to safeguarding security across the Strait and in the Asia-Pacific region.

Chien Hsi-chieh is a legislator and the director of the Peacetime Peace Foundation.

Translated by Jackie Lin
This story has been viewed 4441 times.