Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Abstract: This paper analyses the moral arguments for ballistic missile defence, focusing in particular on the case made by Just War theorist James Turner Johnston that contemporary missile defence constitutes a form of moral obligation. Drawing on critiques of similar lines of argument put forward in the 1980s, the assumptions and precepts of Johnson’s argument are critically assessed. In the main, it is argued here, these critiques are still of relevance to contemporary moral consideration of ballistic missile defence; however, the general reconfiguration of the concept of imminent threats characteristic of recent preventive war argumentation – most prominently in the National Security Strategy of 2002 – is now also implicitly relied upon to lend added credence to ground the moral case for ballistic missile defence. After outlining Johnson’s moral advocacy of missile defence and its potential limitations, the paper then illustrates this crucial convergence in the moral cases made for preventive war and ballistic missile defence.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper examines the issuing of calculating acceptable nuclear risk, a pressing issue for international security policy, by examining the issue of tactical nuclear weapons in Cuba.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: On December 17, 2002, President George Bush directed Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld to proceed with fielding an initial set of missile defense capabilities to protect the United States as well as its friends and allies. Once fully deployed, this system will be composed of: (1) ground-, air-, sea-, and space-based sensors to provide early warning, characterization, and tracking of missile launches anywhere in the world; (2) ground-, air-, and sea-based interceptors to destroy enemy missiles or their warheads upon impact; and, (3) redundant fire control centers for battle management, command, and control. This will represent the most significant milestone achieved so far in implementing the third leg of the New Triad introduced in the 2001 Nuclear Posture Review. This paper examines the roles and missions prescribed for missile defense by the NPR, including the potential contributions of missile defense to the four objectives established by the NPR and other documents for overall U.S. strategic forces, that is, to assure, dissuade, deter, and defeat/defend. It then summarizes the substantial progress to date in implementing the NPR's vision for missile defenses, noting that in some ways the actual program has outpaced the modest goals set by the NPR. It then reviews the technical, cost, and diplomatic challenges to further implementing the NPR's missile defense recommendations, and concludes with some observations on the long-term prospects for missile defense's staying power.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: Rising from the ashes of World War II, the Japanese view on their national security has been constructed as a result of the confrontation of two identities, realism and pacifism. The former emphasizes material factors in international security such as military and economic power, and therefore perceives the US-Japan alliance as being crucial. The latter stresses ideational factors such as social norms and values, and therefore maintains that the peace constitution is vital in explaining Japan's security policy. After the demise of the Cold War, Japan has been facing serious challenges in its defense and security policy. This can be observed in the issue of Japan's missile defense. In light of the Japanese identity complex --realism versus pacifism-- this paper will focus on and analyze how the Japanese have perceived and reacted to the threat of ballistic missiles, what they have done and will do to deal with it. First, it will review Japan's post World War II security policy and identity, with a particular focus on coping with the threat of ballistic missiles. Second, it will analyze the current debate on Japan's missile defense program. Finally, it will conclude by discussing what the Japanese identity on national security is and how Japan should handle the ballistic missile threats in the context of international security.

Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: The missile defense (MD) literature has given little attention to the role of adversary reactions before a crisis emerges. By assessing the influence of uncertainty on decision-makers in challenger states, this paper questions the widespread claims by missile defense proponents that MD will produce benign responses from potential adversaries. The paper concludes that it is unlikely that MD will dissuade countries from building threatening missiles. Through an analysis of public statements and reports about MD capabilities by scientists and analysts both within and outside of government, this paper argues that the deployment of missile defenses will not be the last move in the strategic missile game and that the rational response of potential adversaries to the US MD effort would be to build more missiles and/or find ways to counter MD technologies.