PRESS RELEASE

1 May 2000

Europeans Decry U.S. NMD Plans

Use U.N. Forum to Urge Protection of ABM Treaty, NPT  

UNITED NATIONS, NY - U.S. plans to develop a National Missile Defense (NMD) system are piquing negative reaction in Europe, including among NATO allies. Despite U.S. assurances - including a May 1 pledge to work with the other four nuclear weapon states to “preserve and strengthen” the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty - there are a number of reasons for European concern.  

Many European governments see the NMD program, being touted as a defense against a so-called rogue missile attack on the continental United States, as an overreaction to a low-probability threat. At the same time, they worry that the political consequences on global stability could be dire. For example, some European officials fear that the U.S. NMD system could break down the strategic ties across the Atlantic by providing the United States with a missile defense not available to the European NATO allies. As two of the radar facilities critical to the U.S. NMD program are in Europe (one in Britain and one in Greenland), there also is public concern about Europe becoming a target for anyone bent on attacking the United States. 

Most importantly, however, many European officials are seriously worried about the possibility that a U.S. missile defense network not only could halt (or reverse) U.S.-Russian reductions in nuclear arms, but also spark new tensions between Moscow and NATO. 

Russian Foreign Affairs Minister Igor S. Ivanov, in his opening statement during the April 14-May 19 U.N. conference here to review the multinational nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), said U.S. plans to deploy an NMD system that would violate the ABM Treaty threaten U.S.-Russian nuclear arms control efforts. “We must be perfectly clear on this: further reductions in strategic offensive weapons can only be considered in the context of preservation of the ABM Treaty. … One has to be fully aware of the fact that the current system of arms control agreements is a complex and quite fragile structure. … The collapse of the ABM Treaty would, therefore, undermine the entirety of disarmament agreements concluded over the last 30 years.”

“The Europeans, and the Russians, have a right to be both concerned and confused,” said Theresa Hitchens, BASIC’s research director. “The U.S. statement at the NPT conference in support of the ABM Treaty is in direct contradiction with recent threats by top U.S. government officials to walk away from the treaty if Washington does not win Moscow’s approval for amendments to allow NMD deployment.” 

In addition, U.S. allies fear spurring China into a new round of nuclear and missile development - in turn resulting in similar steps by India and Pakistan. China’s small nuclear arsenal, originally designed as a deterrent and a hedge against domination by Russia and the United States, would be rendered all but  moot by a U.S. NMD system.  

European officials fret that especially if the United States decides to unilaterally break out of the ABM Treaty to deploy NMD, the entire international non-proliferation framework could be destroyed. 

The European concerns were made clear at the NPT review conference here, with excerpts from several statements below. A fuller compendium of NMD-related statements and other documents from the NPT conference can be found on BASIC’s Web site: www.basicint.org 

Portugal (Representing the 15-Nation European Union)

Jaime Gama, Portuguese State Minister and Minister for Foreign Affairs  

“The [European Union] … reaffirms the importance of the ABM Treaty, as one of the pillars of strategic stability. The [European Union] wishes to see that treaty preserved.” 

Sweden

Anna Lindh, Swedish Minister of Foreign Affairs  

“My government is deeply concerned about the United States' plans for a national missile defense (NMD) system. Such a system could run counter to efforts to halt proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Proliferation must instead be met by strengthening the non-proliferation regime. An NMD system would put in question the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which is repeatedly referred to by both states parties as being a cornerstone of strategic stability. There is a risk that such actions jeopardize this balance, and have negative consequences for nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation.”  

United Kingdom

Peter Hain, British Minister of State for Foreign & Commonwealth Affairs 

“Consideration of NMD by the United States has been prompted by growing concerns about the acquisition of long-range ballistic missile capabilities by some countries that do not form part of established deterrence relationships. We understand these concerns. They need to be addressed. But active missile defence raises complex and difficult issues. The United States has made clear that in taking decisions on NMD, it needs to take a number of important considerations into account, including the need to preserve strategic stability. We welcome that. We believe that these matters should be addressed bilaterally with the Russians through calm, measured dialogue. … We have made clear to both sides that we continue to value the ABM [Treaty], and wish to see it preserved.” 

France

Hubert de La Fortelle, French Permanent Representative to the U.N. Conference on Disarmament 

“France attaches the utmost importance to maintaining strategic stability, of which the ABM Treaty is an essential element. It is anxious to avoid any challenges to the treaty liable to bring about a breakdown of strategic equilibrium and to restart the arms race.”    

Back to NMD Home Page