Building on Reagan's Vision

COMMENTARY Conservatism

Building on Reagan's Vision

Apr 10th, 2017 2 min read
COMMENTARY BY
Edwin J. Feulner, Ph.D.

Founder

Edwin J. Feulner is the founder and former president of The Heritage Foundation.
Thirty-four years ago, Reagan described a visionary goal to help secure our country. Now we must build on his vision. Pictures From History/Newscom

When a politician promises something that “holds the promise of changing the course of human history,” we naturally assume it's typical overstatement. But when President Ronald Reagan said that on March 23, 1983, in reference to his Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI), he was exactly right.

His speech that day introduced Americans and the world to SDI, a comprehensive, layered ballistic-missile-defense program designed to protect the United States and its allies from a threat that had bedeviled it for more than 20 years. It marked a true turning point in our adversarial relationship with the Soviet Union.

The Heritage Foundation was privileged to lay the visionary groundwork that led to Reagan's historic announcement. The year before the president's SDI address, the foundation published its first missile-defense study, “High Frontier: A New National Strategy.” The study proposed a comprehensive system, including laser weapons capable of intercepting Soviet missiles as they were launched or while they traveled in space toward the United States.

The study was driven by a gap in U.S. defense posture: While we could track incoming missiles, we were unable to do anything about them. Such vulnerability was unacceptable to the new commander in chief.

Reagan's new policy was truly visionary. At that point, most of the country's policymaking elite considered Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD, appropriately enough) an acceptable policy to deter the Soviet Union. MAD relied on maintaining devastating second-strike forces, meaning that even if an enemy attacked the United States first, enough U.S. nuclear forces would survive to inflict massive casualties to that enemy.

Reagan was skeptical of the MAD doctrine. He didn't believe missile defense was impossible for the nation that had succeeded in putting a man on the moon more than a decade earlier.

MAD was problematic during the Cold War, partially because the Soviets never accepted its premises and planned on winning a nuclear war. But it serves us even less today.

Adversaries and potential adversaries have chosen to exploit U.S. vulnerability and invested heavily in ballistic missiles, as well as programs researching and developing lethal payloads for them. The threat from ballistic missiles is only 33 minutes away.

Building on Reagan's legacy, the United States slowly woke to the ballistic-missile threat, withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty that prohibited missile-defense deployments in 2002, and started an initial missile-defense program designed to protect the country. With a track record of successful intercepts, the U.S. missile-defense program has proven its critics wrong.

But a lot more work remains to be done. The new administration must invest in space-based missile-defense interceptors, as envisioned under SDI. We must develop and deploy directed-energy weapons, building on SDI's research and development legacy.

With ballistic-missile-defense technologies becoming more available, the task is more urgent than ever.

Thirty-four years ago, Reagan described a visionary goal to help secure our country. Now we must build on his vision — and ensure that we have a viable missile-defense capability that protects us all well into the future.

This piece originally appeared in Pittsburgh Tribune-Review

More on This Issue