Democrats attack Bush's vision for security

By Sridhar Krishnaswami

WASHINGTON, MAY 2. In being short on details about his missile defence plan or in ``reaching out'' to Russia, the U.S. President, Mr. George W. Bush, has sparked scepticism in many quarters, especially in the country. Mr. Bush's speech at the National Defence University on Tuesday may be what the Conservatives and the right wing wanted to hear, but Democrats were quick to criticise him.

``We fear the President may be buying a lemon here. There has not been a shred of evidence that this works,'' said the Senate Minority Leader, Mr. Tom Daschle, referring to the missile defence system. And the ranking Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr. Joseph Biden, argued that while he would support funding for research and development for a Theatre Missile defence, he was against any elaborate missile defence plan. ``... we should not head down the Star Wars road again,'' he said.

Urgent threat

In making his pitch for the missile defence system, Mr. Bush touched on a favourite theme of his and that of his administration - the dangers of more nations having weapons of mass destruction at their disposal. ``Most troubling of all, the list of these countries includes some of the world's least responsible states. Unlike the Cold War, today's most urgent threat stems not from thousands of ballistic missiles in Soviet hands, but from a small number of missiles in the hands of these states - states for whom terror and blackmail are a way of life,'' Mr. Bush said.

To Democrats and other critics of the proposal, there were at least two factors to be reckoned with. First, the project was so esoteric and on the lines of the Strategic Defence Initiative of the Reagan administration days that its feasibility was in question. Second was the cost. The proposal for a sea, land and space-based system could cost up to $1 trillion, said Mr. Biden.

The missile defence system was not the only thing that caught the attention of sceptics at home and abroad. Mr. Bush did not say it in as many words but the message on the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty was unambiguous. He condemned the treaty as a Cold War relic saying it was time to make a ``clear and clean break with the past''. This must have been like music to the ears of the right wing, who for long had little or no use for the treaty.

Canada, for instance, said a U.S. decision to abandon the ABM treaty could trigger an arms race. ``We have made a number of points clear to the United States in the various discussions we have had. Number one is that we think a unilateral abrogation of the ABM Treaty would be very problematic for us,'' the Foreign Minister, Mr. John Manley, said in Ottawa.

Campaign pledge

If some felt Mr. Bush's speech had little surprises, it was not without reason. In the first place, the President was sticking to a campaign pledge on the National Missile Defence and said he favoured a system that took into account the interests of the U.S. and its allies in Europe and Asia.

And secondly, if the President did not come up with specific numbers in nuclear arsenals reductions, the Conservative camp has been calling for a more informal arrangement without pegging it to specific numbers to have the element of flexibility. Once again the President has obliged his domestic constituency.

Mr. Bush called his Russian counterpart, Mr. Vladimir Putin, before the address at the NDU, and the White House said Mr. Putin was apparently appreciative of the call from the American leader. Mr. Bush's positive references to Russia in the post-Cold War environment has given the outward impression that the Republican administration is keen on working with the Russians on the new ``framework''.

Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Section  : International
Next     : India, Russia defence ties on track