The first step towards the Bush administration's new missile doctrine is set for Saturday, when Air Force General Ronald Kadish, head of the Missile Defense Agency, attends a ceremony to break ground on silos for six interceptor missiles at Fort Greely, Alaska. It is due to be completed by September 2004.

It will be the first time in 30 years that there are no constraints on Washington's ability to test and deploy systems able to down long-range enemy missiles.

US President George W. Bush gave notice in December, despite Russian objections, that the United States would unilaterally withdraw from the treaty signed in 1972 with the now-defunct Soviet Union forbidding such tests.

While many have regarded the treaty as the cornerstone of arms control for nearly three decades, Bush has dismissed it as a "relic" of the Cold War.

Bush, along with Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, believes the United States is vulnerable to long-range missile attack coming from Iran, Iraq or North Korea, nations that Bush has dubbed the "Axis of Evil."

According to the Pentagon, the Alaska missile site, which would have been prohibited under the ABM treaty, is mainly a "test bed" enabling the military to monitor tests in the Pacific.

So far, the Pentagon has successfully shot down four "enemy" missiles in seven attempts.

US critics of Bush's missile defense plans note the shield would have done nothing to stop the attacks of September 11 or thwart the detonation of a radioactive "dirty" bomb in a US city.

Lawmakers, too, are unhappy that contractors developing the military defense system have been exempted by Rumsfeld from providing Congress with financial or technical details of their progress or upcoming tests.

Philip Coyle, a senior Pentagon official under president Bill Clinton, wrote in the Washington Post Tuesday that the program would cost 70 billion dollars, and more than 200 billion "for the full, layered system planned by the Bush administration."

The Pentagon "has made a decision that threatens to keep the American public and Congress in the dark" about the program's progress, he said.

But Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy, countered in the conservative Washington Times that the ABM treaty was an "insuperable obstacle to developing and deploying effective protection against missile attack for the American people."

Gaffney expressed pleasure that the treaty was "formally consigned to the dust-bin of history."

But Bush's efforts could be stymied at the last minute. On Tuesday, 31 members of Congress filed a lawsuit in federal court challenging his authority to pull out of the treaty.

The lawsuit filed in US District Court here argues that only Congress can abrogate international treaties, and accuses Bush of violating the US Constitution.

Critics of Bush's decision to withdraw from the treaty have failed in both houses of Congress to bring a resolution opposing the move to a vote.

"It is possible that a judge could order a delay," said Pam Bain, spokeswoman at the Missile Defense Agency. "We have no idea when he could take a decision."

Related Links
SpaceDaily
Search SpaceDaily
Subscribe To SpaceDaily Express

Memory Foam Mattress Review

SPACE MEDIA NETWORK PROMOTIONS Solar Energy Solutions Tempur-Pedic Mattress Comparison ... Newsletters :: SpaceDaily :: SpaceWar :: TerraDaily :: Energy Daily XML Feeds :: Space News :: Earth News :: War News :: Solar Energy News