DATE=11/12/1999
TYPE=EDITORIAL
TITLE=EDITORIAL: MEETING THE MISSILE THREAT
NUMBER=0-08531
CONTENT=


THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO EDITORIALS BEING
RELEASED FOR BROADCAST 11/15/99.

Anncr:  The Voice of America presents differing 
points of view on a wide variety of issues.  Next, 
an editorial expressing the policies of the United 
States Government:

Voice:  In the next fifteen years, the United 
States may well face the threat of missile attacks 
from such states as North Korea and Iran, and 
possibly Iraq.  As one element in meeting these 
possible threats, the U.S. is developing a system 
to defend against long-range ballistic missiles.

The U.S. has not made a decision to deploy a 
national missile defense system.  President Bill 
Clinton will decide no earlier than next summer, 
based on considerations of technical readiness, 
threat, cost, and security, including arms control 
objectives.  If a decision to deploy is made next 
year, the first phase of a national missile 
defense system could be in place by 2005.  As 
planned, it would be capable of defending all 
fifty U.S. states against the launch of a few tens 
of North Korean warheads.  It would also provide a 
defense against a limited attack of a few warheads 
launched from the Middle East.  Later phases of 
the system would provide protection against a 
greater Middle East threat.

One factor still under consideration is the 1972 
Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty between the U.S. and 
Russia.  In the U.S. view, a limited defense 
system is fully compatible with the fundamental 
purpose of the A-B-M treaty.  That purpose is not 
to ban defenses altogether, but to ensure that 
each side's strategic deterrent is not undermined 
by the missile defenses of the other side.

Russia currently has the world's only operational 
A-B-M system, as allowed by the A-B-M treaty.  The 
U.S. believes that the A-B-M treaty can be 
modified to permit deployment of a limited 
national missile defense - by the U.S. and by 
Russia, too, if it wants to guard against similar 
threats from rogue states.  And the treaty itself, 
as presidents Clinton and Boris Yeltsin have both 
pointed out, provides for consideration of changes 
in the strategic situation, and possible changes 
to the treaty to maintain its viability.

In recent discussions, the U.S. has put forward a 
number of ideas for practical cooperation with 
Russia on missile defense.  While Russia has so 
far not been receptive, the U.S. continues to 
pursue negotiated changes so that the A-B-M treaty 
can be preserved with an option to deploy a 
national missile defense system.  The U.S. 
believes that a cooperative approach on national 
missile defense and the A-B-M treaty will provide 
benefits to both U.S. and Russian security.

Anncr:  That was an editorial expressing the 
policies of the United States Government.  If you 
have a comment, please write to Editorials, V-O-A, 
Washington, D-C, 20547, U-S-A.  You may also 
comment at www-dot-voa-dot-gov-slash-editorials, 
or fax us at (202) 619-1043.



12-Nov-1999 14:41 PM EDT (12-Nov-1999 1941 UTC)
NNNN

Source: Voice of America
.