Despite a failed trial and considerable criticism, the government seems determined to continue with an $60 billion anti-missile defense program. One reason can be found by looking at the strategic consequences of even thinking about a working anti-missile system. PNS commentator Franz Schurmann, professor emeritus of history and sociology at UC-Berkeley, writes widely on foreign affairs.

Defense Secretary William Cohen says the recent failed anti-missile missile test over the Pacific was not a failure, only a "glitch." The Pentagon is preparing for an even more critical test of the National Missile Defense (NMD), and its counterpart the Theater Missile Defense (TMD), as early as October.

The U.S. intelligence community estimates that only Russia and China pose a long-range nuclear missile threat to North America over the next 10 to 15 years. Yet they don't expect either of them to launch an attack.

So why is America developing a weapons technology widely condemned by American allies and rivals as well as a loud chorus of American defense experts?

The "foolproof NMD" the Pentagon is working on is a defensive system that can destroy every nuclear missile fired against the USA -- no matter how many are launched simultaneously. A foolproof TMD will have the same capability. The difference between the two is that the NMD will be installed on American territory and the TMD on the territory of an American ally -- "theater" here is shorthand for an area of military operations.

One answer to the "why" question is that the NMD is a cover for the TMD -- an interpretation bolstered by Cohen's pledge to install the first NMD on Shemya island in the western Aleutian islands. While close to mostly barren Russian territory, such a site would be only a few thousand miles from China's vital centers.

The Pentagon is a long distance away from announcing a perfect missile defense that can thwart a Russian first strike against North America. On the other hand, the Pentagon believes NMD technology, despite test failures, is close to a capability to explode a small number of missiles well before they reach North America. That is why it the proposed NDM is always called "limited."

The Russians have thousands of intercontinental missiles but the Chinese have only a few. A "go" decision for NMD would in effect be aimed at China. But what most concerns the Chinese is that a go decision for NMD implies a go for TMD. Significantly, at strategic talks recently restarted in Beijing by top American and Chinese leaders, TDM is the most prominent subject.

It's no secret that many, if not most, Taiwanese want to be protected against Chinese attack by an American security umbrella. Recently Taiwan media showed a Republic of China (ROC) Phantom airplane launching a Mica anti-missile missile -- both American-made -- and destroying an incoming missile in a simulated attack.

It now seems that U.S. troops will remain in South Korea even if North and South should achieve reunification. While there are no American forces in Taiwan, one condition Washington could impose for persuading Taiwan to accept reunification on Beijing's terms is setting up a TMD on Taiwan.

If all three players agreed on such a scenario it could greatly further the new Pax Americana. Beijing will essentially achieve reunification on its terms, namely "one China" and only one China. Taiwanese will feel relieved because the American security umbrella still protects them. And America will have drawn China into the Pax Americana the way Russia would be if it agreed to join NATO. This scenario suggests NMD is a cover for TMD.

But another answer to the question suggests the opposite -- that TMD is a stepping stone to NMD. In September 1967, Defense Secretary McNamara proposed a "limited anti-ballistics missile (ABM)" project aimed at China. However shortly after his inauguration President Nixon shifted the project to a full-scale ABM aimed at the Soviet Union. Could we now be witnessing a continuation of the long effort to once again make the USA invulnerable to inter-continental attack?

In the 19th century America was isolated from the rest of the world through two huge oceans. Starting in September-October 1949 American leaders began to worry that isolation was breaking down. First came the Soviet Union's successful detonation of an atomic device. A few weeks later the triumphant Chinese Communists inaugurated the new People's Republic of China.

A frenzy of worry exploded in America. The potential combination of Russian nuclear missiles and unlimited Chinese manpower made many Americans feel they could face annihilation by a strange new force, Communism. Yet Americans retained their sense of having a historic destiny beyond U.S. borders -- an idea that had received a big boost by overwhelming victory in WW II. And they had deep faith that technology was the core of that destiny.

In May 1972 President Nixon decided to end the ABM. Instead he launched an arms control project with the Communist Russians and invited the Communist Chinese to join the world community. Nevertheless work on missile defense kept on going.

As electronic guidance systems became more and more sophisticated hope again has arisen that, after all, a perfect missile defense can eventually be achieved. That would make America invulnerable to any nuclear attack. Is this now America's new Holy Grail?