Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Obama Scraps Missile Defense in Czech Republic, Poland

President Obama’s decision to scrap long-range-missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic seems aimed at enlisting Russian support in dealing with Iran.

Print Friendly

Inter Press Service

In a move with potentially major strategic implications, U.S. President Barack Obama announced Thursday he is scrapping plans by the George W. Bush administration to deploy long-range-missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic.

The United States will instead deploy what Obama called “proven, cost-effective” systems more swiftly throughout Europe – and possibly beyond – to deter and defend against possible attacks by Iranian short- and middle-range missiles on which the Islamic Republic has been focusing its development efforts.

“To put it simply, our new missile defense architecture in Europe will provide stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of American forces and America’s allies,” Obama said, noting that Secretary of Defense Robert Gates and the joint chiefs of staff of the armed forces had unanimously recommended adoption of the new strategy. Gates served as Bush’s Pentagon chief from 2006 to 2009.

The move, which was swiftly endorsed as a “positive step” by the new North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) Secretary-General, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, was also greeted positively by the Kremlin, whose spokesmen said the decision should remove a major irritant in U.S.-Russian relations.

Moscow’s leaders have long charged that the Bush plan was directed primarily against Russia, rather than Iran or other “rogue states” that might acquire the capability of launching nuclear-tipped inter-continental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), as Washington had always insisted.

In his statement, Obama reiterated that position, and other U.S. officials said the change in strategy was unrelated to his desire to “re-set” U.S.-Russian relations.

“We’ve…repeatedly made clear to Russia that its concerns about our previous missile defense programmers were entirely unfounded,” Obama insisted.

“Our clear and consistent focus has been the threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missile program, and that continues to be our focus and the basis of the program that we’re announcing today,” he stressed, inviting “Russia’s cooperation to bring its missile defense capabilities into a broader defense of our common strategic interests, even as we continue our shared efforts to end Iran’s illicit nuclear program.”

Proponents of the abandoned program, however, were livid at the decision, suggesting that both Tehran and Moscow would benefit at the expense of the U.S. and its allies.

Republican Sen. Jon Kyl described it as “dangerous and short-sighted” that would not only “leave America vulnerable to the growing Iranian long-range missile threat, (but) also turns back the clock to the days of the Cold War.”

Former Bush U.N. Ambassador John Bolton denounced the decision as “pre-emptive capitulation” and “a convenient smoke-screen to do what (the Obama administration) wanted to do anyway, which is to give up on missile defense in the hope the Russians will be nice to us.”

“It is a concession to the Russians with absolutely nothing in return,” he told the BBC.

Thursday’s announcement followed a lengthy review of Washington’s missile defense strategy, and particularly Bush’s controversial plan to deploy a sophisticated radar-guided, ground-based interceptor system in the Czech Republic and Poland, by Obama’s top national security advisers.

The system, which has never been tested, was supposed to become operative by 2012. While some Polish and Czech leaders saw the plan as a useful demonstration of Washington’s commitment to protect their countries against pressure from a resurgent Moscow, their parliaments never actually ratified the basing agreements that would have been required to implement it.

Meanwhile, the urgency of the threat against which the system was nominally designed – long-range missile attacks by Iran – appears to have diminished, according to the latest government and independent assessments of Tehran’s missile development program. The latest estimate is that Iran is unlikely to have an ICBM capability until 2015 at the earliest.

“It would have been extremely unwise to proceed with the Bush administration’s plan to rush untested interceptors into Poland to deal with an Iranian long-range missile threat that does not yet exist,” noted Tom Collina, the research director of the non-governmental Arms Control Association (ACA).

Tehran, on the other hand, has made much more progress on short- and medium-range missiles that theoretically could be launched against closer targets, including southern Europe, Israel, Washington’s Arab allies in the Middle East and the Gulf, as well as U.S. troops in Iraq and Afghanistan.

“Ironically, the Bush plan did nothing to address those threats,” noted Gregory Thielmann a former senior State Department intelligence analyst who now works with ACA.

In that respect, according to Joe Cirincione, a nuclear-proliferation expert who heads the Ploughshares Fund here, the new plan strikes a “more aggressive posture” against the alleged threat posed by Iran’s missile program than Bush’s.

“You will see the Obama administration deploying [missile] interceptors much more quickly off of Iran,” Cirincione, a former adviser to the Obama campaign, told a press teleconference arranged by the National Security Network.

He said he expected Washington to deploy sea-based Aegis missile defense systems, probably in the Black Sea, by 2011.

At a Pentagon news conference following Obama’s announcement, Gates stressed that the new system would put land-based interceptor systems in Europe as well. Thielmann suggested that the change of strategy may also permit Washington to take advantage of Russian radar systems in Azerbaijan, Iran’s northern neighbor.

Obama’s decision will no doubt help “re-set” relations with Moscow as both countries enter into bilateral negotiations to reduce their nuclear arsenals. However, it remains unclear whether it will also induce greater cooperation by the Kremlin in U.S. efforts to impose new sanctions on Tehran in the event that negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program – set to begin Oct. 1 – do not bear fruit.

Before their appointments, several senior Obama officials now assigned to the Iranian nuclear file suggested publicly that Washington should be prepared to give up Bush’s missile defense plan in Poland and the Czech Republic in exchange for such cooperation by Moscow.

Another major issue raised by Thursday’s announcement will be the reaction in Warsaw, Prague, and other capitals of former Soviet bloc countries worried about Russia’s increasingly assertive stance in its neighborhood.

Obama, who reportedly personally informed the Polish and Czech heads of government before the announcement, has dispatched top officials to the region to reassure them about Washington’s continued commitment to their defense.

Washington is already legally committed to defending those eastern European nations, including Poland and the Czech Republic, that are members of NATO.

Jim Lobe is the Washington bureau chief of the Inter Press Service and a contributor to PRA’s Right Web (http://rightweb.irc-online.org). His blog on U.S. foreign policy can be read at http://www.ips.org/blog/jimlobe/.

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Established in Baltimore in 1897, the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) is the oldest Zionist organization in the United States—and also among the most aggressively anti-Arab ones.


U.S. Defense Secretary James “Mad Dog” Mattis is a retired U.S Marine Corps general and combat veteran who served as commander of U.S. Central Command during 2010-2013 before being removed by the Obama administration reportedly because of differences over Iran policy.


Mike Pompeo (R-KS) is a conservative Republican congressman who was voted into office as part of the “tea party” surge in 2011 and chosen by Donald Trump to be director of the CIA.


Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas and an evangelical pastor, is a 2016 Republican presidential candidate.


David Albright is the founder of the Institute for Science and International Security, a non-proliferation think tank whose influential analyses of nuclear proliferation issues in the Middle East have been the source of intense disagreement and debate.


The former GOP presidential candidate and Speaker of the House has been a vociferous proponent of the idea that the America faces an existential threat from “Islamofascists.”


Billionaire investor Paul Singer is the founder and CEO of the Elliott Management Corporation and an important funder of neoconservative causes.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly

President Trump and his Iranophobe supporters are itching for a war with Iran, without any consideration of the disastrous consequences that will ensue.


Print Friendly

The war of words and nuclear threats between the United States and North Korea make a peaceful resolution to the escalating crisis more difficult than ever to achieve.


Print Friendly

The new White House chief of staff, retired Marine Corps Gen. John Kelly, is anything but non-partisan or apolitical. For the deeply conservative Kelly, the United States is endangered not only by foreign enemies but by domestic forces that either purposely, or unwittingly, support them.


Print Friendly

The prospects of Benjamin Netanyahu continuing as Israel’s prime minister are growing dim. But for those of us outside of Israel who support the rights of Palestinians as well as Israelis and wish for all of those in the troubled region to enjoy equal rights, the fall of Netanyahu comes too late to make much difference.


Print Friendly

Rich Higgins, the recently fired director for strategic planning at the National Security Council, once said in an interview on Sean Hannity’s radio program, that “more Muslim Americans have been killed fighting for ISIS than have been killed fighting for the United States since 9/11.”


Print Friendly

This is how the Trump administration could try to use the IAEA to spur Iran to back out of the JCPOA.


Print Friendly

President Trump seems determined to go forward with a very hostile program toward Iran, and, although a baseless US pullout from the JCPOA seems unlikely, even the so-called “adults” are pushing for a pretext for a pullout. Such an act does not seem likely to attract European support. Instead, it will leave the United States isolated, break the nuclear arrangement and provide a very reasonable basis for Iran to restart the pursuit of a nuclear deterrent in earnest.


RightWeb
share