Those hurdles will grow even higher if Congress starts increasing money for its favorite programs as Bush's budget proposals proceed through the legislative process. Fiscal issues aren't the only challenges facing the missile defense plan. Senate Democrats also raised sharp questions Wednesday about issues of arms control, diplomacy and military strategy. Cost analysis was virtually impossible because the White House gave few details about the missile shield the president envisions.
Deterrence alone is no longer an effective strategy.
Senate Democrats also said they would consider it a grave mistake for Bush to abrogate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which its defenders say has been the cornerstone of nuclear deterrence, and warned that unilateral deployment of a robust missile defense system could leave the nation less secure by sparking a new arms race. The treaty sharply limits anti-missile defenses on the deterrence theory that, because no nation can defend against a nuclear missile attack, none will risk launching such an attack. Gaddis Smith, a diplomatic scholar and retired Yale University history professor, said the anti-ballistic missile pact contains language that allows either side to give notice and withdraw. This article includes material from The New York Times. All rights reserved.