Tuesday, February 08, 2011

So They Ratified Our Security Away And Then. . .

Why why why would you trust the Russians to go through with this?

Newsmax:

Russia Warns US on Missile Plan, Balks on START
Monday, 07 Feb 2011

MOSCOW — Russia sees the planned U.S. missile defense system as a potential threat to its nuclear forces and may review its participation in a landmark nuclear arms treaty, officials said Monday.

The New START deal, the centerpiece of President Barack Obama's efforts to reset ties with Russia and the most significant arms control pact in nearly two decades, took effect last week. It limits each country to 1,550 strategic warheads, down from the current ceiling of 2,200.

The treaty doesn't prevent the U.S. from building new missile defense systems, but Russia has warned that it reserves the right to withdraw from the treaty if the United States significantly boosts its missile shield.

Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov reaffirmed Monday that a buildup in the U.S. missile defense capability would prompt Moscow re-consider its obligations under the New START treaty.

"If the U.S. increases the qualitative and quantitative potential of its missile defense . . . a question will arise whether Russia should further abide by the treaty or would have to take other measures to respond to the situation, including military-technical measures," Ryabkov said, according to Russian news agencies.

Russia was strongly critical of the previous U.S. administration's plan to deploy missile defense sites in Poland and the Czech Republic and hailed Obama's decision to scrap it. But the Kremlin has remained concerned about revamped U.S. missile defense plans and continued to see them as potentially dangerous to its security.

NATO approved a plan last fall for a U.S.-led missile shield in Europe and invited Russia to join, but Moscow hasn't yet made a definite commitment. Experts from both sides will analyze the issue and report to defense ministers in July.

Ryabkov warned Monday that Russia won't cooperate with NATO on the project unless it's treated as a full partner.

"This must be a joint system with shared responsibilities, information exchange and decision-making in order to make us an equal and responsible member," he said. "If two separate networks are built, things won't change for us and we will see a situation when the NATO system could potentially be used against Russia's security interests. Cooperating on such a system would mean hurting ourselves."

Russian officials have remained skeptical about U.S. and NATO claims that the proposed shield is designed to fend off a missile threat from Iran.

Russia's Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said Monday the U.S. missile defense could only be aimed against Russian missiles. "This system could undermine Russian nuclear deterrent forces," he said.

2 comments:

jeppo said...

If there's been one singular success of the Obama administration, it's been the great improvement in relations with Russia. The new START treaty reduces nuclear weapons across the board, increases trust, cooperation and transparency, and enhances, not endangers, American, European and Russian security.

Under Bush, the US tried to outflank Russia by expanding NATO to include Ukraine and Georgia (wisely vetoed by Germany and France), tried to set up missile defence systems in Poland and the Czech Republic, supposedly directed against Iran, which has no nuclear weapons or ICBMs to deliver them, when in reality everybody understood that they were directed against Russia, and supported Georgia in their insane and suicidal war against Russian-supported South Ossetia.

These policies were driving Russia away from the West and directly into China's orbit. American belligerence led to Russia, China and other nations in the region forming the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a Eurasian quasi-NATO, thereby undermining 40 years of US diplomacy designed to drive a wedge between Russia and China, going back to Nixon and Kissinger.

In the long term, the direction Russia takes will determine the balance of power in the world. If they turn west, then an American-European-Russian Northern Hemisphere alliance will dominate the world for decades to come. If they turn east, then a Chinese-Russian-Islamic Eurasian bloc will eventually gain the upper hand over us, politically, economically and militarily.

From a culturist perspective, Russia, as a European Christian nation, belongs with us in the West. They are already a member of the G8 and are negotiating to join the OECD, two of the major Western transnational organizations. If the differences between NATO and Russia over missile defense can be ironed out, then full membership for Russia in NATO is the next logical step, permanently tying Russia to the West and stymieing China's Eurasian ambitions.

If an anti-Russian Republican, like John McCain for example, is elected president in 2012, the Europeans might decide that securing their eastern flank with Russia is more important to their long-term security than maintaining the trans-Atlantic alliance. NATO could fall apart and the US would be strategically isolated in the Western Hemisphere. Cui bono? Above all, China.

Our long-term enemies are China and the Muslim world, not Russia. Every effort should be made to cement Russia's place as a full-fledged member of the West and its institutions, including NATO. IMO there is no more important foreign policy goal than this. Obama, to his credit and whether he even realizes it or not, is working towards this goal and should be commended for it.

Pastorius said...

Interesting points, Jeppo. Thanks. I hadn't looked at it that way.