The Strategic Defense Initiative has been out of the news recently, but its scientific and political proponents still exist. Should the United States be thinking differently about defence in this era of glasnost ?
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
References
Canavan, G. & Teller, E. Nature 344, 699–704 (1990).
Clausen, P. & Brower, M. Technology Review p. 60 (October 1987).
Wood, L. Aerospace America 20 (April 1990).
Defense Science Board Report on SDIO Brilliant Pebbles Space-Based Interceptor Concept (Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Washington, DC, 1989).
Speed, R.D. ASATs vs. Brilliant Pebbles Report UCRL-ID-103669 (Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, 1990).
Garwin, R.L. Nature 346, 21 (1990).
Bloembergen, N. & Patel, C.K. Rev. Mod. Phys. 59, No. 3 Part II S30–S32 (1987).
Bunn, M. Foundation for the Future: The ABM Treaty and National Security 90–103 (Arms Control Association, Washington, DC, 1990).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Brower, M. Strategic defence after the cold war. Nature 347, 326–328 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1038/347326a0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/347326a0
