Defining a U.S. defense plan

A fresh thinking has been promised by the U.S. Defense Secretary, Mr. Donald Rumsfeld, in regard to the daunting task of visualizing as also developing and deploying a state-of-the-art missile defense system. He has expressed political misgivings about describing the proposed plan as a national missile defense system (NMD).

He says "national" and "theater" are words that aren't "useful" in reference to the specific missile defense plans of the U.S. The original proposal for a national missile defense system is often seen as a possible scheme aimed at protecting only the U.S. and its assets as also interests that span the world.

The ideas about the related theater defense networks relate to the U.S.-led effort to carve out geopolitical sanctuaries of safety from ballistic missile attacks.

The notion of theater defense will, by a commonsensical definition, apply to a collection of states with strategic links to the U.S. However, the U.S. has not so far delineated these concepts with much precision. It is in this context that Rumsfeld has now argued that what's "national" and what's "theater" depends on where you live.

However, he is keen that the current fresh thinking should go beyond the political significance of any change in the nomenclature. The term NMD came dramatically into vogue in the final phase of the previous Clinton presidency, and Rumsfeld himself had played a pivotal role during that period in formulating an expert opinion about the imperative of a missile defense shield.

In seeking to insulate the U.S. missile defense plans from the ambiguities of terminology, the Defense Secretary may have also complicated the prevalent perceptions about them. These plans, in his view, will be designed to meet an obvious aspect of "asymmetrical threats" from terrorism and cruise missiles, as well as ballistic missiles, "information warfare".

The present bottom line in the U.S. strategic plans, as outlined by Rumsfeld, is to prevent such vulnerabilities so that not only the U.S. and its forward-deployed forces outside its shores but also its allies could feel equally secure "to the extent that is possible".

Now, this is perhaps indicative of a move by the Bush administration to extend the scope of a missile defense system to include the U.S.' allies from the beginning.

Diverse but definitive has been the opposition from Russia as also China and some European countries to the original American plans in this regard.

Their concerns, which Washington has yet to address fully, relate to the perception that any U.S. move, based on its unilateral initiatives that might even receive the friendly assent of its allies, could still destabilize the existing global strategic dispensation.

-- The Hindu, New Delhi