"The Bush administration is seeking to deploy a rudimentary missile defense by 2004 under the pretense of a new testing program in Alaska. Such a crash deployment would provide only the illusion of protection from potential long-range missile threats, while at the same time it would violate the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty and set off a dangerous action reaction cycle, involving the United States, Russia, and China," said Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers.

"Abrogating the ABM Treaty against the objections of most Europeans makes a mockery of President Bush's pledge to 'consult' with allies and with Russia on the missile defense issue. Consultation should be a two-way process, as our security will be adversely affected if the United States breaks its treaty commitments " added Rebecca Johnson of the London-based journal, Disarmament Diplomacy.

"The true purpose of the Bush plan seems to be to shoot down the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty rather than incoming ballistic missiles. We urge Congressional leaders -- Democrats and Republicans -- to block this ill-advised decision,'" said John Isaacs, president of the Council for a Livable World. "National missile defense remains a costly and counterproductive shield of dreams," he added.

The Bush Administration's fiscal 2002 defense budget request proposes a substantial increase in spending on missile defenses. The Bush budget calls for fifty-seven percent more spending on missile defense, from $5.3 billion in fiscal 2001, to a proposed $8.3 billion for fiscal 2002. The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Carl Levin (D-Mich.), has said he would seek to block funding for activities that would unilaterally abrogate U.S. treaty commitments.

The fiscal 2002 DoD budget request includes funds for a new anti-missile "test bed" in Alaska, which could be made operational in the event of an "emergency," according to the Bush administration. Construction will begin in August and a violation of the ABM Treaty could occur some months after.

The ABM Treaty allows for agreement on additional national missile defense test sites unless such test sites constitute de-facto deployment of national anti-missile capabilities, which is the intention of the Bush scheme. The Associated Press reports that an unnamed Russian Foreign Ministry spokesperson responded by saying: "We will view the first cubic meter of concrete laid under the launching pad for interceptor missiles in Alaska as the United States' formal withdrawal from the ABM Treaty."

"There is no quick, easy or cheap national missile defense technology," said Lisbeth Gronlund, staff scientist for the Union of Concerned Scientists.

"The plan outlined by the Pentagon would provide very little protection should an attack occur. Even if the interceptor and kill vehicle technology worked to some level of effectiveness by 2004-2005, the system would use existing and relatively inadequate radars that would have very little capability to discriminate the warhead from other objects, including debris or simple decoys. Thus, it could be fooled by very simple countermeasures," said Gronlund.

At least 20 or more flight intercept tests, plus hundreds of component and subsystem tests will be needed before the Pentagon will be ready to attempt realistic operational testing of such an NMD system, according to the June 2001 report entitled, "NMD Development is Not Hostage to the ABM Treaty," written by Phil Coyle, former head of DoD's Operational Test & Evaluation and currently at the Center for Defense Information. (See http://www.cdi.org/dm/2001/.)

"The ABM Treaty remains important to arms control as well as nuclear nonproliferation because it promotes stability and facilitates offensive nuclear weapons reductions. We must work with Russia, China, and others to accomplish our global security goals and not act unilaterally," added John Rhinelander, the former U.S. legal advisor for the Nixon Administration's ABM Treaty negotiation team.

"Rather than rush toward deployment of an unproven NMD system, President Bush should redouble efforts to secure nuclear material in the former Soviet Union, pursue deep, verifiable, U.S. and Russian nuclear arms reductions, elimination of dangerous, Cold War launchonwarning and targeting plans, and pursue a comprehensive nuclear proliferation effort, including the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty and a verifiable freeze of North Korea's ballistic missile program," concluded Kimball.

The Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers is a non-partisan alliance of 14 national nuclear non-proliferation organizations dedicated to the pursuit of a practical, step-by-step program to address the threat of nuclear weapons. For further information on national missile defense and nuclear reductions, see http://www.crnd.org.

###