And just think, all it may have taken was a pretzel.
This normally innocuous baked good became the primary topic of American newscasts Monday, as it almost brought about the untimely demise of President George W. Bush. I exaggerate of course, but I do so only to show more clearly the point which this incident exhibits in high relief already -- that the old adage, pride goes before the fall, still holds true. It also shows that no matter how sophisticated the systems one uses to protect our most cherished things, be it a president or a country, there will always be a way for something to slip through.
The corollary that I am attempting to draw here is between the aforementioned pretzel incident and one of Mr. Bush's most contentious policies, the pursuit of a national missile defense shield. This also includes the related United States withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty with Russia. It is the Bush administration's belief that building a national missile defense system is the best way to protect the American people from so called "rogue states" such as North Korea and Iraq. The need for such a defense, they argue, is heightened now in light of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks.
Never mind the technological problems that became blatantly obvious when the proposed defense system failed to intercept its target on two consecutive occasions during testing. I am no rocket scientist and shall leave this kind of critique to others. What I would like to point out is that there are several flaws in the reasoning of the Bush administration in building this shield. The pretzel incident shows how the simplest means can circumvent the mightiest defenses. Such was the case on Sept. 11, when Osama Bin Laden's operatives needed nothing more than a couple of knives and some airplane tickets. It was not a missile or some other high-tech weapon, but rather sheer human determination, that brought about the worst terrorist attack in U.S. history. In moving forward with a missile defense shield program, the Bush administration will be creating a white elephant that will in no way be able to protect Americans from future attacks. Why should a rogue state waste money and resources on a missile program when finding a couple of fanatics would be just as -- if not more -- effective?
The danger of building this shield goes far beyond a mere waste of valuable resources, however. The U.S. withdrawal from the ABM treaty provides stark evidence for how this system will in fact increase the danger to American citizens. By going it alone, the U.S. has isolated itself from the world community and instead of building the ties to other countries that would ensure American security, it has severed them. President Bush stated that the ABM treaty "hinders our government's ability to develop ways to protect our people." Yet he forgets that the original aim of the ABM treaty was in fact to protect the American people. What was needed was not the destruction of the treaty but the creation of more treaties like it. Further evidence for the increased danger can be found in a recent CIA report that states that China plans to increase the number of nuclear weapons aimed at the U.S. from 20 to 100 by 2015. This is due to China's fear that a missile defense shield will nullify its nuclear deterrent, hence justifying the need for the increase.
The best way to protect the American people therefore is not to build a missile defense shield, but to place all of this country's energies into forging closer ties within the international community. The instinct to cocoon ourselves on this continent is one that must be resisted, for this can't provide a permanent solution. America needs to go out into the world to try and address the issues that have caused the hatred that was behind the Sept. 11 attacks. Just imagine how much it would help if the eight billion dollars that are earmarked for the missile defense program were instead used in foreign aid. Undoubtedly, it would stop people overseas from cheering for the next pretzel that comes down the line.
