Debating deficits, debating deterrence
Hehir, J. Bryan
Church/world watch deficits, debuting deterrence J. Bryan Hehir AS THIS NEW YEAR begins in Washington, the issue which was so mysteriously absent in the election debates — nuclear...
...In their view, a proposed system which is not demonstrably essential to deterrence and which is very costly should not be approved by Congress...
...It is precisely this kind of analysis which the bishops' pastoral letter sought to provoke with its "conditional moral acceptance" of deterrence...
...The principal exponent is President Reagan, and the classical text was his Star Wars speech of March 1983...
...The moral argument cuts across both the strategic and economic dimensions of the deficit debate...
...The deficit debate will provide a forum where economic, strategic, and moral arguments about defense policy and strategy will converge...
...The moral argument is central to the tradeoff of military versus non-military spending...
...Admittedly, there have been different definitions of deterrence — from Massive Retaliation through Flexible Response and Mutual Assured Destruction to Countervailing Power — but each of these has rested upon the premise of deterrence...
...Its promise to free the world from the nuclear threat challenges the notion of deterrence en route to fulfilling that promise...
...At this writing it appears that the president does not agree defense spending should be as vulnerable to cuts as other sectors of the budget...
...Since the 1950s the organizing idea of U.S...
...deterrent...
...nuclear policy has been deterrence...
...But these are precisely the charges brought against MX and Star Wars...
...The fundamental argument goes right to the core concept of the nuclear age...
...Following upon the pastoral, Cardinal Bernardin and Archbishop O'Connor testified before the Congress that certain criteria should be used in assessing proposed additions to the U.S...
...This tactical debate must produce immediate policy decisions...
...This is not an argument against the critics...
...While the fundamental debate about the very concept of deterrence proceeds, a tactical debate does also...
...The strategic critique takes several forms: deterrence drives the arms race to new levels of danger...
...It focuses variously on the risk of deterrence, on the cost of the arms race, and on the intention which sustains the effective threat of deterrence...
...deterrence in sum, is tending to lead us toward rather than away from use...
...The first question is who will bear the burden of the national debt...
...Both the MX missile and the Star Wars program, for different reasons, seem to fail the test...
...If it is insulated, the burden of the debt will be borne by those least able to absorb more cuts in social spending...
...The speech was based on principles which are logically inimicable to deterrence...
...The strategic argument is that some strategic programs and systems in the budget are open to a substantial critique in terms of their impact on the arms race and the prospect of arms control...
...At this fundamental level of the nuclear debate, the critiques from the left and right offer a diagnosis of deterrence which is more profound than any proposals they offer as substitutes...
...The more complex argument is how to determine which cuts should be made within the defense budget...
...possession of the weapons will inevitably lead to their use...
...the left critique has now been joined by a vigorous dissent from the right...
...The deficit debate could force a useful examination of the content and character of the U .S...
...For a system to be essential for deterrence, it should not move the deterrent balance toward less stabilitiy or in the direction which increases the chance of use of nuclear weapons...
...Church/world watch deficits, debuting deterrence J. Bryan Hehir AS THIS NEW YEAR begins in Washington, the issue which was so mysteriously absent in the election debates — nuclear arms policy — is clearly rcemerging...
...One is fundamental, the other tactical...
...This is no longer the case...
...J. BRYAN HEHIR 11 January 1985: 7...
...It offers no immediate response...
...In the early 1980s the critique of deterrence was almost entirely mounted from the left...
...But they may unless the arguments are made against them...
...Neither the MX nor Star Wars should survive the deficit debate...
...The moral critique is also multi-faceted...
...The dissatisfaction with deterrence leaves a political-moral vacuum...
...The Star Wars proposal drives the debate back to the fundamental level, for it challenges the very notion of deterrence, and at an astronomical cost...
...Today both the idea and the policy of nuclear deterrence are under attack from the left and the right of the political spectrum...
...both sides make a strategic and a moral argument against deterrence...
...But it does mean that while the fundamental level of the present debate is very important, in the short-run it will be indecisive...
...The impact of the MX would contribute to the already dangerous trend toward "first-strike" pressures on both the Soviets and the United States...
...These criteria provide interesting guidance for the debate about the elements of the deterrent...
...The challenge from the left issues equally from religious organizations and secular institutions...
...The argument is similar in both cases: deterrence is strategically too risky and morally defective...
...Two levels of the nuclear question are evident...
...The economic imperative is that cuts must be made somewhere...
...Decisions are necessary immediately because a $200 billion deficit threatens the political and economic security of the nation...
...deterrent...
...The basic moral imperative is that the military budget should not be excluded or insulated from the budget-cutting process...
Vol. 112 • January 1985 • No. 1
