This important effort provided the framework for shifting America's focus toward the new dangers of the post-Cold War era. This has led to a revamping of the ballistic missile defense program. Currently, the U.S. looks at counter-proliferation in two ways. The first is as a prevention approach to block weapons of mass destruction from getting into the hands of potential aggressors. Deterrence Deterrence is also important.
Deterrence can work.
But we have to find that magic formula that will insure that the aggressor knows what the results of his utilizing these kinds of systems would be and convince him it would not be to his advantage to utilize them. As Les Aspin has mentioned, however, it would be very hard to deter a terrorist group. Counter-force involves the use of offensive weapons, special operating forces, infantry, or whatever is necessary to find a weapon in its stockpile, while it is being fabricated, or while it is moving across a bridge in order to knock that weapon out before it is launched. Most of our Alliance countries have offensive means such as fighter planes, bombers, and weapons of various kinds that we can use to go after the launch capability of an enemy. Active Defense From my standpoint, the cornerstone of counter-proliferation, when all other measures fail, is active defense.