ABSTRACT
Soviet reluctance to even discuss real limitations on the intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) fleet points out the gulf between US and Soviet views. We consider the use of nuclear weapons as unthinkable other than as a retaliatory deterrent—that is, to prevent war. Token arms control does absolutely nothing to reduce either the dangers or projected effects of nuclear war. The most immediate argument in favor of developing active defenses: they remove the preemptive option, both for the Soviet Union and the United States. Growing preemptive capability has been and continues to be the prime factor in the spiraling arms race. Strategic defenses of the type we can reasonably project—even in their early modes—can be vital catalysts for arms control. Strategic defense therefore provides an option for a world effectively disarmed of nuclear weapons, by retaining national sovereignty and security.
