uiring ballistic missiles that will have intercontinental attack range that capable of striking the United States. (Beard)Disturbed by the Rumsfeld report, Capital Hill responded immediately by passing two bills. The first bill known as S. 257 stated, “It is the policy of the United States to deploy as soon as is technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense system capable of defending the territory of United States against limited ballistic missile attack”. The S.257 was followed by a second bill named H.R. 4 passed in March of 1999 that stated, “It is the policy of the United States to deploy a national missile defense.” (Policy.com)The proposal of the National Missile Defense System by Capitol Hill is a clear example of the international security dilemma, where the United States’ desire to become more secure compromises other states’ security. By setting up a missile defense to escape the power of other states, this will only create insecurity in the international arena that will prompt other states to react with their own missile defense system. This dynamia can also be seen through the prisoner’s dilemma diagram (Figure 1). The United States fears for the worst possibility so it arms itself to increase its protection. It does not trust the other players in the international community and does not want to find itself in a position of vulnerability. In the prisoner’s dilemma, this “self-help” approach equates to the lack of trust between the states, this feeling of insecurity leads to all states arming themselves. For this very reason, the United States should not deploy the NMD system because it will lead to a new arms race between all states.United StatesTermination of National Missile DefenseContinual of National Missile Defense Other statesTermination of National Missile DefenseIf all states can trust one another, a NMD system would not be necess...
