The contemporary global security agenda is dominated by issues where technology is seen as central: the so-called ‘Revolution in military affairs’, the future of nuclear weapons, the proliferation of conventional and nuclear weapons globally, their prospective use in terror attacks, ‘cyber-terrorism’ and so the list goes on. One such case where consideration of technology comes to the fore in relation to security is ballistic missile defence in the United States. Ballistic missile defence (or BMD) is a weapons system intended to protect America from nuclear missile attack by shooting down incoming intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). This current concept has had previous incarnations as the anti-ballistic missile programmes of the 1960s, the Strategic Defense or (‘Star Wars’) Initiative of the 1980s and National Missile Defense in the 1990s.

Under the leadership of President George W. Bush, missile defence underwent a resurgence in its fortunes in the United States. The fledgling elements of a system were put in place with several interceptor missiles deployed in silos at two separate locations – Fort Greely, Alaska and Vandenberg airbase in California – since late 2004. Missile defence attracted consistent support from the Bush administration, ostensibly justified by concerns over ballistic missile and nuclear weapons proliferation particularly in relation to ‘rogue states’ such as North Korea and Iran. Of concern to many outside the USA, however, is the fact that BMD is predicated upon a particular variant of strategic thought that assumes the efficacy of defensive technology for the post-Cold War era, as distinct from traditional theories of deterrence which generally tended to downplay the role of defences.