While talking of armement race between nato-russia...take a glance ; ...one can find criticisms of NATO’s missile defense plans far closer to home than Moscow. As he sees it, the criticisms turn on necessity, feasibility and costs: It’s not obvious, Rösli stated, that NATO members will face any serious ballistic missile threats in the near future. The Alliance has frequently pointed to the Iranian nuclear program as the primary motive for developing a BMD capability, but Tehran may be years away from being able to combine a nuclear warhead with a ballistic missile and then launch an attack into the heart of Europe. Moreover, if Iran and the P5+1 nations succeed in reaching a comprehensive nuclear agreement this year, the Iranian threat scenario will become even less likely. Second, just how reliable NATO’s missile defense system is – either in whole or in part – is questionable, as the mixed results of test trials have shown. Finally, missile defense is expensive. Although it is unclear what the total cost of NATO’s system will be, the United States alone will pay several billion dollars for the long-term operation and support of BMD elements in Europe.
Posted on: Mon, 26 Jan 2015 08:27:00 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015