A history of the MX-missile controversy might make interesting reading if one had a lot of time to kill and a sense of humor that ran toward extended perusals of the Congressional Record. Without these prerequisites, however, it would prove to be a long and frustrating lesson in modern American politics. One thing is certain—the lesson has not yet ended. Debate over the MX will undoubtedly continue until the final stages of deployment. But it now appears fairly certain the long-debated missile will be built and added to the U.S. nuclear arsenal. At this crucial point in the MX’s progress through the congressional maze, let us take a deep breath and plunge back into the shades of doubt surrounding America’s newest nuclear weapon.
The most fiery point of contention during the congressional debates concerned the basing proposal, which calls for the missiles to be deployed in old Minuteman silos scattered throughout the Western plains. Opponents criticized this strategy as inefficient and vulnerable. This weak basing option, they continued, would jeopardize current nuclear stability, since the Soviets would reason that a vulnerable missile can only be a first-strike weapon. This might, consequently, tempt them into a pre-emptive strike. MX supporters, able to maintain their position against other charges, found themselves hard-pressed to defend the Western silos. Unfortunately, the proposed site seemed to be the only option.
Comments