TRADING 'GOOD' FOR 'IFFY'

TRADING 'GOOD' FOR 'IFFY'
Los Angeles Times: So much for multilateralism. The Bush administration took office ignoring or promising to scrap treaties, not holding much regard for the United Nations and looking to go it alone in foreign policy. After Sept. 11 there was hope that had changed.
But now come reports that Washington will abandon the 1972 Antiballistic Missile Treaty, a cornerstone of relations with the Soviet Union and later with Russia. Washington is expected to announce its intention soon, within weeks or perhaps even days. The administration said the United States would be better off with a national missile defense system to protect against nuclear attack.
Cooperation: What's really best for the United States is for Washington to work with Russia to interpret or amend the ABM treaty so that some testing and construction of missile defenses could occur.
A national missile defense system would be enormously expensive, and there are no indications it's feasible. The ABM treaty shouldn't be junked for a "maybe" defense.
Bad timing: The timing of the reports are unfortunate, coming one day after Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said in Russia that both sides were "very close" to an agreement on exactly how many offensive nuclear weapons each would destroy. That represents progress in removing an existing threat.
Bush said in his speech at the Citadel Tuesday that the U.S. needs "limited and effective defenses against a missile attack." He again called the ABM treaty a relic of "a different era."
European leaders, not to mention the Chinese and the Russians, dispute that. Powell flew from Russia to Germany, where Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said that while arms control agreements might be modified, they should not be tossed into the trash. Russian Foreign Minister Igor S. Ivanov described the ABM agreement as key to ensuring stability in the world -- although he indicated that Russia might not take reprisals if Washington abrogated the pact.
Strategic foundation: The ABM treaty is not a relic but a strategic foundation; that's why it has lasted so long. Washington needs Russian cooperation on other matters, including assistance to Iran's nuclear power program and security at Russian nuclear sites, so old Soviet weapons don't someday wind up in the United States on a ship or plane in the custody of terrorists. The United States has warned Russia of its concerns about Iran and rightly is helping with funds to improve security of nuclear weapons.
For each dollar spent, Washington -- and the world -- will get more safety from securing existing weapons than from a technically very iffy missile defense that requires the United States to scrap a long-standing and useful treaty.