But his successor should have the opportunity to make it in a more dispassionate and fresh setting. The technology alone would be reason to put off the issue. The failed test last month was the third, of which only one has shown any success at all. No one has ever been able to say with certainty what kind of defense is possible, and the test failures certainly don't inspire any more confidence in the system. Even more pressing than technology at this point, however, should be genuine diplomatic concerns about what this system could do to relationships with friend and foe alike.
European allies are less than thrilled.
The Russians have raised an even more serious obstacle the language of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty which forbids a missile defense. As for foes, North Korea, which has seemed to be a threat worthy of such a defense, is now talking about rapprochement with South Korea and even the United States. At this late date, the United States has nothing to stop foes and nothing to placate friends. Indeed, the United States has nothing at all to show. By all means, the Pentagon and the administration should continue their debate, but they should keep it out of the presidential debates and on ice for the next president.