Analysts: Clinton missiles decision won't impact election

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -- President Clinton's move to delay a decision on building a national missile shield prompted further Republican attacks on his defense credentials but was unlikely to affect the U.S. presidential election.

Analysts said the issue, crucial to the U.S. national defense debate but which has arisen at a time of U.S. global dominance when Americans perceive little threat to their security, was playing low in the polls.

Both Vice President Al Gore, who has been closely associated with Clinton's policy, and Republican candidate Gov. George W. Bush, support some form of National Missile Defense (NMD) system in the face of a growing threat from states like North Korea and Iran.

Clinton justified leaving a decision to his successor, after he leaves next January, by saying the technology needed further testing and that it would give more time for diplomatic initiatives to lessen the international impact.

Bush, who is making what he calls the Clinton-Gore administration's "mishandling" of defense a campaign theme, advocates a comprehensive land, sea and space-based system closer to the "Star Wars" concept of President Ronald Reagan.

Gore still foresees a more limited system, specifically aimed at protecting the 50 U.S. states against accidental firings or isolated attacks by small countries.

With the race close two months before the Nov. 7 election, some Democrats had feared that if Clinton put off the decision it could expose Gore to charges of being weak on defense, where Republicans traditionally have an edge over Democrats.

Bush quickly issued a brief statement: "Today's announcement that President Clinton will leave this unfinished business for the next President underscores the fact that for seven years, the Clinton-Gore administration has failed to strengthen America's defenses."

Gore, in a more detailed response, said: "The President's decision allows time for additional testing of our NMD system. I welcome the opportunity to be more certain that these technologies actually work together properly."

It would give time for discussing the issue with Russia, which warned a U.S. deployment could cause the whole web of international arms control agreements to collapse, and with China, which opposes it, and NATO allies, which are sceptical.

Analysts believed however that in a campaign dominated by domestic affairs, including education, health care and taxes, the issue of missile defenses would be unlikely to sway many votes.

"I don't see NMD as an issue," said pollster John Zogby.

"Of course people favor a strong national defense and a majority favors a national missile defense system," he said, adding: "But it's hard for me to see there is any passion or any constituency for this."

"The impact on the presidential race is going to be minimal," said Stephen Young, an arms control expert who has been a leading force in the public relations movement in Washington to stop deployment of NMD.

"The administration's concern was that Gore would be hurt by this, but even Bush has said he would not object to having the decision left to him."

Young, Deputy Director of the Coalition to Reduce Nuclear Dangers, added: "Polling data has shown that if you explain the problem to the American people they understand that it is not wise to rush ahead with such a complicated technical program."

Copyright 2000 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.