Editing Strategic Defense Initiative (section)

==Controversy and criticism==
{{more citations needed section|date=June 2024}}

[[Jessica Savitch]] reported on the technology in episode No.111 of ''[[Frontline (American TV program)|Frontline]]'', "Space: The Race for High Ground", on November 4, 1983. The opening sequence shows [[Jessica Savitch]] seated next to a laser that she used to destroy a model of a communication satellite. The demonstration was perhaps the first televised use of a weapons-grade laser. No theatrical effects were used. The model was actually destroyed by the heat from the laser. The model and the laser were realized by Marc Palumbo, a High Tech Romantic artist from the [[MIT Program in Art, Culture and Technology|Center for Advanced Visual Studies]] at MIT.

[[Ashton Carter]], then a board member at [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology|MIT]], assessed SDI for Congress in 1984, noting difficulties in creating an adequate missile defense shield, with or without lasers. Carter said X-rays had a limited scope because they become diffused by the atmosphere, much like the beam of a flashlight spreading outward in all directions. This means the X-ray sources needed to be close to the Soviet Union, especially during the boost phase, for the Soviet missiles to be both detectable to radar and targeted by the lasers. Opponents disagreed, saying advances in technology, such as using stronger beams, and by "bleaching" the column of air surrounding the laser beam, could increase the distance that the X-ray could travel to successfully hit its target.{{citation needed|date=June 2024}}

Physicists [[Hans Bethe]] and [[Richard Garwin]], who worked with Teller on both the atomic bomb and hydrogen bomb at [[Los Alamos National Laboratory|Los Alamos]], claimed a laser defense shield was unfeasible. They said that a defensive system was costly and difficult to build yet simple to destroy and claimed that the Soviets could easily use thousands of decoys to overwhelm it during a [[nuclear attack]]. They dismissed the idea of a technical solution to the [[Cold War]], saying that a defense shield could be viewed as threatening because it would inhibit Soviet offensive capabilities while leaving America's offense intact. In March 1984, Bethe coauthored a 106-page report for the [[Union of Concerned Scientists]] that concluded "the X-ray laser offers no prospect of being a useful component in a system for ballistic missile defense."<ref name="UCS">{{Cite magazine |last1=Bethe |first1=Hans A. |last2=Garwin |first2=Richard L. |last3=Gottfried |first3=Kurt |last4=Kendall |first4=Henry W. |date=1984 |title=Space-based Ballistic-Missile Defense |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/24969454 |magazine=Scientific American |volume=251 |issue=4 |pages=39–49 |doi=10.1038/scientificamerican1084-39 |jstor=24969454 |bibcode=1984SciAm.251d..39B |issn=0036-8733}}</ref>

In response, when Teller testified before Congress he stated that "instead of [Bethe] objecting on scientific and technical grounds, which he thoroughly understands, he now objects on the grounds of politics, on grounds of military feasibility of military deployment, on other grounds of difficult issues which are quite outside the range of his professional cognizance or mine."<ref>{{cite book|last=Lett|first=Donald G.|title=Phoenix Rising: The Rise and Fall of the American Republic|year=2008|publisher=AuthorHouse|location=United States|page=264}}</ref>

On June 28, 1985, [[David Parnas|David Lorge Parnas]] resigned from SDIO's Panel on Computing in Support of Battle Management, arguing in eight short papers that the SDI software could never be made trustworthy and that such a system would inevitably be unreliable and menace humanity in its own right.<ref name="Parnas85">{{cite journal|last=Parnas |first=D. L.|url=http://klabs.org/richcontent/software_content/papers/parnas_acm_85.pdf |title=Software Aspects of Strategic Defense Systems |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927074918/http://klabs.org/richcontent/software_content/papers/parnas_acm_85.pdf |archive-date=September 27, 2011 |journal=Communications of the ACM|date=December 1985|volume=28 |issue=12|pages=1326–1335 |doi=10.1145/214956.214961 }}</ref> Parnas said he joined the panel with the desire to make nuclear weapons "impotent and obsolete" but soon concluded that the concept was "a fraud".

===The nickname "Star Wars"===

[[File:Keinen Krieg der Sterne.JPG|thumb|SDI drew criticism from abroad as well. This 1986 [[Socialist German Workers Youth]] graffiti in [[Kassel|Kassel, West Germany]] says {{lang|de|"Keinen Krieg der Sterne! Stoppt SDI! SDAJ"}} (No star wars! Stop SDI! [[Socialist German Workers Youth|SDAJ]]).]]

Historians from the [[Missile Defense Agency]] attribute the term "Star Wars" to a ''[[Washington Post]]'' article published March 24, 1983. It quoted a speech delivered by Democratic Senator [[Ted Kennedy]] the previous day, describing the proposal as "reckless ''Star Wars'' schemes", a reference to the [[space opera]] film series ''[[Star Wars]]''.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.smdc.army.mil/2008/Historical/Eagle/WheredowegetStarWars.pdf|first=Sharon Watkins |last=Lang |title=Where do we get 'Star Wars?'|date=March 2007|publisher=SMDC/ASTRAT Historical Office|work=The Eagle|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090227050446/http://www.smdc.army.mil/2008/Historical/Eagle/WheredowegetStarWars.pdf|archive-date=27 Feb 2009|url-status=dead}}</ref> Some critics used the term derisively, implying it was an impractical science fiction. In addition, the American media's liberal use of the moniker (despite President Reagan's request) did much to damage the program's credibility.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Kengor |first=Paul |url={{google books|plainurl=yes|id=6yidZucL-KAC|page=181}} |pages=181–183|title=The Crusader: Ronald Reagan and the Fall of Communism |date=2009-10-13 |publisher=HarperCollins |isbn=978-0-06-174099-2 |language=en}}</ref> In comments to the media on March 7, 1986, SDIO Acting Deputy Director Dr. Gerold Yonas described "Star Wars" as an important tool for Soviet [[disinformation]] and asserted that the nickname gave an entirely wrong impression of SDI.<ref>{{cite web |last=Yonas |first=Gerold |date=March 7, 1986 |title=SDI: Prospects and Challenges |url=http://commonwealthclub.org/missiledefense/yonassp.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100713010908/https://www.commonwealthclub.org/missiledefense/yonassp.html |archive-date=2010-07-13 |website=Missile Defense Forum}}</ref>

Supporters of the SDI program eventually began to use the nickname as well. [[George Lucas]], the creator of the ''Star Wars'' franchise, sued public interest groups High Frontier (a liberal organization that supported the program) and Committee for a Strong, Peaceful America (a conservative organization) in 1985 for trademark infringement. The lawsuit was dismissed by Judge [[Gerhard Gesell]], who ruled that political application of the term was a non-commercial usage outside of the scope of trademark.<ref name="Justia1985">{{cite web |date=November 26, 1985 |title=Lucasfilm Ltd. v. High Frontier, 622 F. Supp. 931 (D.D.C. 1985) |url=https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp/622/931/2395863/ |access-date=February 21, 2025 |publisher=law.justia.com}}</ref><ref name="WashingtonPostFeinberg">{{cite news|last1=Feinberg| first1=Lawrence |title=Lucasfilm's 'Star Wars' Lawsuit|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1985/11/13/lucasfilms-star-wars-lawsuit/c1c2ca50-8bc2-4f96-a792-5c22b7b3a35d/|access-date=February 21, 2025|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=November 12, 1985}}</ref><ref name="GiantFreakinRobotZagranis">{{cite web|last1=Zagranis | first1=Zack |title=Star Wars Creator Sued Government For Stealing Ideas|url=https://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/ent/star-wars-george-lucas-sdi.html|access-date=February 21, 2025|website=Giant Freakin Robot}}</ref><ref name="TimeBeckwith">{{cite web|author=Ryan Teague Beckwith |title=George Lucas Wrote ‘Star Wars’ as a Liberal Warning. Then Conservatives Struck Back|url=https://time.com/4975813/star-wars-politics-watergate-george-lucas/|access-date=February 21, 2025|website=Time|date=October 10, 2017}}</ref>

===Treaty obligations===

[[File:SDIO KEW Lexan projectile.jpg|thumb|SDI was not just lasers; in this Kinetic Energy Weapon test, a {{convert|7|g|oz|order=flip|adj=on}} [[Lexan]] projectile was fired from a [[light-gas gun]] at a velocity of {{convert|23000|ft/s|m/s mph}} at a cast aluminum block.]]

Another criticism of SDI argued that it would be inconsistent with existing treaties. The [[Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty]] and its subsequent protocol,<ref>{{cite web|url=https://fas.org/nuke/control/abmt/text/abmprot1.htm |title=Protocol to the Treaty between the United States of America and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics on the Limitation of Anti-Ballistic Missile Systems|date=May 24, 1976}}</ref> which limited missile defenses to one location per country at 100 missiles each ([[ABM-1 Galosh|which the USSR had]] and the US did not){{clarify|date=January 2025|reason=It's unclear what the content in parentheses means, and how the ABM-1 Galosh is specifically relevant to this.}}, would have been violated by SDI ground-based interceptors. The [[Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty]] requires that "Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control." Many{{Who|date=October 2009}} viewed deployment of ABM systems as an escalation, and therefore a violation of this clause, although this view was not universal.{{citation needed|date=June 2024}}

The [[Outer Space Treaty]] of 1967 required "States Party to the Treaty undertake not to place in orbit around the Earth any objects carrying nuclear weapons or any other kinds of weapons of mass destruction, install such weapons on celestial bodies, or station such weapons in outer space in any other manner."<ref>{{cite book |title=Nuclear weapons and contemporary international law |last1=Singh |first1=Nagendra |last2=McWhinney |first2=Edward |year=1989 |publisher=Martinus Nijhoff |isbn=90-247-3637-4 |page=236 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=r2IfMEpPUIsC&pg=PA236}}</ref> This clause forbade the US from pre-positioning in Earth orbit any devices powered by nuclear weapons and any devices capable of "mass destruction". A space-stationed nuclear-pumped X-ray laser would have violated this treaty, since other SDI systems did not require the pre-positioning of nuclear explosives in space.

=== Mutual assured destruction ===
SDI threatened to disrupt the strategic equilibrium ensured by the doctrine of [[mutual assured destruction]] (MAD). This doctrine postulated that neither the U.S. nor the USSR could attack the other without considering the strong probability that both sides would be annihilated.<ref>{{cite web |title=Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) |publisher=Nuclear Museum |url=https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/history/strategic-defense-initiative-sdi/ |website=Atomic Heritage Foundation |access-date=5 June 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240522075523/https://ahf.nuclearmuseum.org/ahf/history/strategic-defense-initiative-sdi/ |archive-date=22 May 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref> A defensive weapon system that could neutralize much of an adversary's nuclear counter-strike force would potentially embolden the possessor to strike first.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Strategic Defense Initiative – The Other 'Star Wars' |url=https://adst.org/2015/11/the-strategic-defense-initiative-the-other-star-wars/ |website=Association for Diplomatic Studies and Training |access-date=5 June 2024 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240201184919/https://adst.org/2015/11/the-strategic-defense-initiative-the-other-star-wars/ |archive-date=1 February 2024 |url-status=live}}</ref>

During the [[Reykjavík Summit|Reykjavík talks]] with [[Mikhail Gorbachev]] in 1986, Reagan addressed Gorbachev's concerns about imbalance by stating that SDI technology could be provided to the entire world – including the Soviet Union – to prevent the imbalance from occurring. Gorbachev answered dismissively. When Reagan proposed technology sharing again, Gorbachev stated "we cannot assume an obligation relative to such a transition", referring to the cost of implementing such a program.<ref name="CNNep22">{{cite news |url=http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/22/documents/reykjavik/ |title=Reagan-Gorbachev Transcripts |website=[[CNN]] |access-date=May 14, 2012 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080119172055/http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/episodes/22/documents/reykjavik/ |archive-date=January 19, 2008}}</ref>

===Whistleblower===
In 1992, scientist [[Aldric Saucier]] was given [[whistleblower protection in the United States|whistleblower protection]] after he was fired and complained about "wasteful spending on research and development" at SDI.<ref name="nytimesscientistsaidtoassertfraud">{{cite news|title=Scientist Said to Assert Fraud in 'Star Wars'|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1992/03/02/us/scientist-said-to-assert-fraud-in-star-wars.html|access-date=August 26, 2017|work=The New York Times|date=March 2, 1996}}</ref> Saucier lost his [[security clearance]].<ref name="washpostlardner">{{cite news|last1=Lardner| first1=George Jr. |title=Army Accuses SDI Critic of Falsifying Credentials|url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1992/04/14/army-accuses-sdi-critic-of-falsifying-credentials/13ffe75f-50f8-4654-9027-536c30880c13/|access-date=August 26, 2017|newspaper=The Washington Post|date=April 14, 1992}}</ref>