Weapons Treaties, Missile Defense

In “Albright Defends U.S. Disarmament Record” (April 25), Secretary of State Madeleine Albright justifies U.S. plans to develop a limited system of ground-based interceptors directed against potential missile programs of states such as North Korea, Iran and Iraq. Not only are these states incapable of launching any real attack on the U.S., but they would have to be suicidal to launch a few missiles at U.S. targets, knowing that our nuclear arsenal would decimate their nations in minutes.

Why do we want to build this missile shield, which has really not been successfully tested, at a cost of $60 billion? Why are we willing to abrogate the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty? President Clinton will be meeting with Russian President Vladimir V. Putin to see if he will agree to modifications of the treaty. Why would Putin agree? We need to take the sensible step of ratifying the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and begin to phase out most of our nuclear weapons in a joint U.S.-Russian effort.

IRVING and RUTH WILLNER

Monterey Park

*

“The Missile Dilemma” (editorial, April 24) is on target. However, one key point is missing: the escalating cost. The START II treaty cuts in half the number of nuclear warheads in the U.S. and Russian arsenals, thereby improving U.S. national security. The treaty also saves U.S. taxpayers $900 million over the next 10 years, due to reduced nuclear weapons manufacturing and maintenance needs.

However, this opportunity to improve security and save money may vanish, as Russia has threatened to withdraw from the START and ABM treaties if the U.S. deploys the National Missile Defense system. The price tag for NMD recently skyrocketed to more than $60 billion. Top scientists claim there are cheap and simple methods potential enemies can use to render the proposed NMD useless. And a leading military contractor allegedly faked tests for a key component of NMD, according to a former senior engineer for the company. These stark security, technical and financial revelations call into question why U.S. taxpayers are pouring more money into a system that does not work.

PAUL SULLIVAN, Director

National Security Project

Taxpayers for Common Sense

Washington