Missile defense and the sdi
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 6

Missile Defense and the SDI PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 44 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Missile Defense and the SDI. The SDI in US Nuclear Strategy. Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) was the theoretical foundation of the US-USSR nuclear relationship Anything that hindered the opponent from inflicting assured destruction was considered “destabilizing”

Download Presentation

Missile Defense and the SDI

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Missile defense and the sdi

Missile Defense and the SDI


The sdi in us nuclear strategy

The SDI in US Nuclear Strategy

  • Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) was the theoretical foundation of the US-USSR nuclear relationship

  • Anything that hindered the opponent from inflicting assured destruction was considered “destabilizing”

  • This premise was used by opponents of missile defenses


Arguments against mad

Arguments against MAD

  • Hoffman claims that MAD should not be the sole guiding principle, since US-USSR relations are far more complicated

  • Military competition around Soviet efforts at peripheral expansion and American efforts to contain them

  • For instance, according to Hoffman it is unclear whether we would really retaliate if the USSR invaded Europe; mutual destruction was not necessarily “assured”

  • The USSR concentrated on its conventional forces in preparation for a potential quick victory in Europe despite MAD

  • Furthermore, the USSR maintained ballistic missile defenses, air defenses, and shelters for political leaders

  • Furthermore, MAD did not fit the domestic political structure of the United States. The perverted logic was not really acceptable to the American public, and the USSR even had reason to believe that the West would not be able to keep up qualitatively


Sdi and mad

SDI and MAD

  • “Assured destruction” implies that only offensive weapons can make MAD stable; defenses are only useful if they protect a nation’s second strike capability

  • However, defenses that reduce civilian casualties are inherently destabilizing

  • Even if one percent of offensive warheads were to get through an SDI system, the US would have to survive one hundred nuclear attacks

  • According to MAD doctrine, defense have to be “leakproof” to be useful; semi-effective defenses are the worst

  • Hoffman claims that missile defenses should be analyzed by how they deter preemptive attack and reduce collateral damage


Impact of defenses on the nuclear balance

Impact of Defenses on the Nuclear Balance

  • Less than comprehensive defenses will raise the offensive force requirements

  • Dual use missile defenses make economizing offensive forces for maximum effectiveness difficult

  • Since the attacker must assume that the defender has assigned the majority of its defensive forces to each target, the defense has the strategic advantage

  • Given this premise, missile defenses may aid deterrence, since it deceases the attacker’s preemptive advantage.


Questions

Questions

  • Is MAD an overly simplistic governing theory as Hoffman claims it is?

  • Do partially effective defenses undermine deterrence or enhance it?

  • Are missile defenses irrelevant in the context of a full scale attack?


  • Login