Just when those who live in a fact-based world are ready to decide that Washington is incapable of rational thought, the government comes through with a wise decision. The Obama administration's cancellation of the program to deploy a missile-defense system in Europe is just such an intelligent move.

This is in sharp contrast to the current debate on healthcare reform, which has reached a surreal level and is reason for despair. The insurance industry, drug companies and other corporate vultures have teamed up with right-wing extremists who have used their usual mix of xenophobia, racism and paranoia to prevent a real discussion of what is best for the nation. The minority party, lacking any ideas or programs of its own, has exploited this opportunity to just say No to resolving what should be the most pressing issue Congress has to consider.

It is therefore remarkable that reason has prevailed in the case of missile defense. True to the norms of our nation's capital however, the rationale for cancelling the program has been justified in terms that are as bogus as the original arguments for taking the decision. The Bush administration claimed that it was essential to place a radar system in the Czech Republic and ten interceptor missiles in Poland to counter missiles that might be launched from Iran.

The real reason for going ahead with an initiative that angered the Russians, alienated our NATO allies and did not have public support in either Poland or the Czech Republic was legacy building. With eight accomplishment-free years in office, Bush desperately needed to provide those at his belief tank at SMU with something positive they could point to as they attempt to rewrite history.

No matter that billions would be spent on a weapons system that does not work designed to counter a threat that does not exist.

The system has never passed a realistic test and can easily be defeated by decoys. In addition, to counter a defensive shield of 10 missiles an adversary needs exactly 11 missiles. Nonetheless those who shill for the military industrial complex are always ready to embrace an ever higher level of defense spending and to use fear to defend it.

The Heritage Foundation, for instance, has a movie that warns darkly that more than 20 countries have missiles, and that one with a nuclear warhead could reach our shores in 33 minutes. They dismiss the idea that deterrence might still work and seem to imply all foreigners are potential fanatics.

The Obama administration did the right thing with its decision, but could not justify killing the program simply on the basis of the fact that it was a monumentally dumb idea. Instead, the excuse offered was a new review of the intelligence had determined that Iran's missile program had not developed as had been projected and therefore a different system was needed. This would seem to be another example, like the case made for invading Iraq, where the conclusions of an intelligence assessment are tailored to fit a political decision that has already been taken.

The Obama administration also cannot say that we need the cooperation of Russia on a whole range of issues more than we need to please some in the governments of a couple of weak Eastern European countries. Russia feared the defense system might morph into a threat to them. Even if that seems unrealistic, are they not entitled to their point of view and should we not take it into consideration? How would we interpret Russia reviving the Warsaw Pact and inviting countries in Latin America to join?

Regardless of the reasons offered, the right decision has been made. Nevertheless, those who lose sleep at night worrying about whether Albania or Argentina might use their missile capability to launch an attack on the United States can rest easy. While the European missile defense system has been cancelled, the one being installed in California and Alaska is still going ahead and wasting some $10 billion a year.

Dennis Jett, a former U.S. ambassador to Mozambique and Peru, is a professor of international affairs at Penn State's School of International Affairs. His most recent book is Why American Foreign Policy Fails: Unsafe at Home and Despised Abroad.