This is blatantly anti-democratic. And this is only unusual because Sullivan states it publicly. Fresh on the heels of the China spy plane crisis comes a piece from John Derbyshire hypothesizing a war with China. The recent incident brought out some ugly rhetoric, which reaches its apotheosis in Derbyshire's piece. Deterrence can no longer be based solely on the threat of nuclear retaliation.
Defenses can strengthen deterrence by reducing the incentive for proliferation.
The last sentence in particular is bizarre, as Wright notes. First, Bush says that a missile defense reduces the incentive for proliferation, which is just wrong. Bush is conceivably hoping that rogue states will simply accept that the likelihood of a successful first strike is reduced and therefore be less inclined to develop weapons of mass destruction. But this makes little sense. Although the defense system is ostensibly not targeted at China or Russia, both have clear incentives to modify and expand their arsenals to try to defeat a defense system and preserve their nuclear capacity in the event of a conflict.