In the past four decades, the United States has spent $85 billion pursuing the fantasy of an effective missle defense system to shield the nation against the threat of a nuclear attack. Recent public tests were spectacular failures and call into question thewhole programmes rationale. In facr, the authors contend that neither the land-based system proposed by the Clinton administration nor the alternatives proposed by ealrier administrations would ever work regardless of the R&D money channeled into the project. Rather than enhancing national security, these doomed efforts would undermine it by provoking a new arms race and allenating key allies, all in response to a greatly exaggerated threat from so-called "rogue states" like North Korea and Iran. Thoughtful diplomacy, not a misguided foreign policy based on a hopeless dream of a "fortress America" is the real answer to meeting America's foreign security goals. While less exotic than some of the original "Star Wars" proposals, recent programmes have proven to be just as ineffectual. Land-based interceptors have repeatedly been deflected by cheap decoys, while sea-based systems cannot be deployed effectivly.
In addition to such terminal and scientific difficulties, the entire development process has been warped by special-interest advocacy, fraud and abuse. Despite such fundamental problems, proponents of nationa missle defense forge ahead, driven by an antiquated view of the world as sovereign self-contained states rather than members of a global economy. Designed to stimulate interest and debate among the public and policy-makers, by providing solid facts and analysis. This guide combines scientific, geopolitical, historical and strategic analysis to critque the delusion of perfect national security.