Discover
/
Article

The Strategic Defense Initiative: Perception vs Reality

JUN 01, 1985
ABM defense technology deserves further research within treaty limits, but the “Star Wars” program is too large, too political, raises false hopes and poses grave dangers to national and world security.
Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky

We have witnessed over the last year or so an enormous growth in the political impact, if not the technical impact, of the President’s Strategic Defense Initiative, popularly called “Star Wars.” Some argue that without this initiative the Soviets would not have “returned to the bargaining table” to resume talks on strategic and intermediaterange weapons. Others argue that with SDI the United States cannot possibly reach an arms‐control agreement with the Soviet Union. The true believers assert that SDI points the way to a future free of nuclear weapons, while opponents claim that it is a sure‐fire prescription for a major escalation in the arms race, the militarization of space and a collapse of the current, albeit limited, arms‐control regime. (See Gerold Yonas’s article on page 24.)

This article is only available in PDF format

References

  1. 1. McG. Bundy, G. F. Kennan, R. S. McMamara, G. Smith, Foreign Affairs 63, 264 (Winter 1984–85).

  2. 2. See R. L. Garwin, K. Gottfried, D. L. Hasner, Sci. Am., June 1984, p. 45.

  3. 3. See J. Boswell, The Life of Samuel Johnson, quotation from 31 July 1763, Oxford U.P., Oxford (1982).

  4. 4. For an outline of a sensible nonconfrontational ABM research program, see S. D. Drell, T. Johnson, cochairmen, Strategic Missile Defense: Necessities, Prospects and Dangers in the Near Term, Stanford Ctr. for Intl. Security and Arms Control, Stanford, Calif., April 1985.

  5. 5. For an outline of allied response to SDI, see P. E. Gallis, M. M. Lowenthal, M. S. Smith, The Strategic Defense Initiative and United States Alliance Strategy, Congressional Research Service, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., 1 February 1985.

  6. 6. For a thoughtful European response to the issue of working within the ABM Treaty, see the 15 March 1985 speech of British Foreign and Commonwealth Secretary Geoffrey Howe, British Embassy Information Department, Washington, D.C.

More about the Authors

Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky. Stanford Linear Accelerator Center.

Related content
/
Article
Figuring out how to communicate with the public can be overwhelming. Here’s some advice for getting started.
/
Article
Amid growing investment in planetary-scale climate intervention strategies that alter sunlight reflection, global communities deserve inclusive and accountable oversight of research.
/
Article
Although motivated by the fundamental exploration of the weirdness of the quantum world, the prizewinning experiments have led to a promising branch of quantum computing technology.
/
Article
As conventional lithium-ion battery technology approaches its theoretical limits, researchers are studying alternative architectures with solid electrolytes.
This Content Appeared In
pt-cover_1985_06.jpeg

Volume 38, Number 6

Get PT in your inbox

pt_newsletter_card_blue.png
PT The Week in Physics

A collection of PT's content from the previous week delivered every Monday.

pt_newsletter_card_darkblue.png
PT New Issue Alert

Be notified about the new issue with links to highlights and the full TOC.

pt_newsletter_card_pink.png
PT Webinars & White Papers

The latest webinars, white papers and other informational resources.

By signing up you agree to allow AIP to send you email newsletters. You further agree to our privacy policy and terms of service.