Triangulation
"The missile defense (in Poland and the Czech Republic)....is directed not towards Russia, but Iran....you have potentially a missile from Iran that threatens either the United States or Europe."
President Barack Obama, March 4, 2009 (per Associated Press)
A check of the map of Europe shows that missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic could shield not only those countries from a missile launched from Iran, but also targets in Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. They would offer no protection to Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, or the rest of Western Europe. But is there even the remotest chance that Iran would attack any of these countries?
Although Obama promised to bring change to the US Government, his rationale for deploying the missile defense system in Eastern Europe is the same lame claim that President Bush made: Iran just might shoot a warhead at Europe. The Russians don't buy it, and neither do I. If the leaders of Poland or other countries on Russia's perimeter are worried about a possible missile attack, they are more likely wary of Moscow than of Tehran.
The Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 reminded Eastern Europeans that Moscow looks on their nations as part of its "sphere of influence." Until about 20 years ago, the Red Army occupied those lands, and they are justly concerned about the robust nationalism that has replaced communism as Russia's pretext for trying to dominate nearby countries. The real purpose of the US missile shield is to reassure Eastern Europeans that the US and NATO are serious about defending them against Russia, should that country revert to its past aggressive behavior. The Russians know it, the Eastern Europeans know it, and so do we.
Then why claim that the missile defense is directed against Iran? The only country any Iranian leader has ever threatened to destroy is Israel; if Obama is worried about Iranian missiles, he should deploy the defense system in Iraq and Jordan, not Poland and the Czech Republic. (1) As crazy as you might think the Iranian leaders may be, they have nothing to gain and much to lose by attacking any country in Europe, as NATO would respond by a devastating bombing of Iran, possibly with nuclear weapons. Even Ahmadinejad is not crazy enough to risk that!
The subliminal story is that Obama, like Bush before him, knows that the Russians hate the very idea of having American missile defenses deployed near their borders. Unlike the US, Russia has real clout with Iran, since Moscow provides the nuclear and missile technology that Iran needs. Obama said that if Iran were not to produce atomic weapons, there would be no need for the missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. The message was clear: if Moscow will help thwart Tehran's nuclear ambition, the missile defense system will not be deployed.
But, unless the Russians are seriously considering launching warheads at Poland or the Czech Republic, why do they care so much about missile defense systems in those countries? I believe that the real reason is pride: they consider western military activity so close to Russia to be an affront to the dignity of a great power, a status that Russia is anxious to regain. It has been reported that Russia has already canceled the sale of a missile defense system to Iran, so there is reason to believe that Obama's trade-off will be accepted.
Iran has been a good customer for Russian technology, but with world oil prices in the doldrums, Iran's ability to keep paying for more and more of it is questionable, Moreover, I suspect that the Russians are concerned that Iran's irresponsible regime may yet blunder into a disastrous war with Israel, which could destroy Iran's oil pipelines and shipping facilities. In that case, Iran could never pay its debts to Russia for the nuclear power plants and missiles the Islamic Republic has already bought.
The gambit of using Russia to pressure Iran is an example of triangulation, a strategy perfected by the Clinton Administration. Let's pray that it works this time!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Actually, Israel and the US have co-developed the Arrow anti-missile system, which protects Israeli airspace right now. ( The Israelis do not consider it worthwhile to use the expensive and high-tech system against short-range rockets fired by Hamas and Hezbollah, saving it for strategic missiles.)
President Barack Obama, March 4, 2009 (per Associated Press)
A check of the map of Europe shows that missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic could shield not only those countries from a missile launched from Iran, but also targets in Germany, Denmark, Sweden and Norway. They would offer no protection to Turkey, Romania, Bulgaria, Serbia, or the rest of Western Europe. But is there even the remotest chance that Iran would attack any of these countries?
Although Obama promised to bring change to the US Government, his rationale for deploying the missile defense system in Eastern Europe is the same lame claim that President Bush made: Iran just might shoot a warhead at Europe. The Russians don't buy it, and neither do I. If the leaders of Poland or other countries on Russia's perimeter are worried about a possible missile attack, they are more likely wary of Moscow than of Tehran.
The Russian invasion of Georgia in 2008 reminded Eastern Europeans that Moscow looks on their nations as part of its "sphere of influence." Until about 20 years ago, the Red Army occupied those lands, and they are justly concerned about the robust nationalism that has replaced communism as Russia's pretext for trying to dominate nearby countries. The real purpose of the US missile shield is to reassure Eastern Europeans that the US and NATO are serious about defending them against Russia, should that country revert to its past aggressive behavior. The Russians know it, the Eastern Europeans know it, and so do we.
Then why claim that the missile defense is directed against Iran? The only country any Iranian leader has ever threatened to destroy is Israel; if Obama is worried about Iranian missiles, he should deploy the defense system in Iraq and Jordan, not Poland and the Czech Republic. (1) As crazy as you might think the Iranian leaders may be, they have nothing to gain and much to lose by attacking any country in Europe, as NATO would respond by a devastating bombing of Iran, possibly with nuclear weapons. Even Ahmadinejad is not crazy enough to risk that!
The subliminal story is that Obama, like Bush before him, knows that the Russians hate the very idea of having American missile defenses deployed near their borders. Unlike the US, Russia has real clout with Iran, since Moscow provides the nuclear and missile technology that Iran needs. Obama said that if Iran were not to produce atomic weapons, there would be no need for the missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. The message was clear: if Moscow will help thwart Tehran's nuclear ambition, the missile defense system will not be deployed.
But, unless the Russians are seriously considering launching warheads at Poland or the Czech Republic, why do they care so much about missile defense systems in those countries? I believe that the real reason is pride: they consider western military activity so close to Russia to be an affront to the dignity of a great power, a status that Russia is anxious to regain. It has been reported that Russia has already canceled the sale of a missile defense system to Iran, so there is reason to believe that Obama's trade-off will be accepted.
Iran has been a good customer for Russian technology, but with world oil prices in the doldrums, Iran's ability to keep paying for more and more of it is questionable, Moreover, I suspect that the Russians are concerned that Iran's irresponsible regime may yet blunder into a disastrous war with Israel, which could destroy Iran's oil pipelines and shipping facilities. In that case, Iran could never pay its debts to Russia for the nuclear power plants and missiles the Islamic Republic has already bought.
The gambit of using Russia to pressure Iran is an example of triangulation, a strategy perfected by the Clinton Administration. Let's pray that it works this time!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(1) Actually, Israel and the US have co-developed the Arrow anti-missile system, which protects Israeli airspace right now. ( The Israelis do not consider it worthwhile to use the expensive and high-tech system against short-range rockets fired by Hamas and Hezbollah, saving it for strategic missiles.)
posted by Gerald S Glazer at 1:18 PM
1 Comments:
All of this assumes that Iran needs the Russia for something. Iran already has missiles that can carry a nuclear warhead to Israel and most of the Middle East; and they have everything they need to make fissionable material for a nuclear bomb; so why would Iran ever do what Russia wanted them to do? What would Iran gain from the Russians for curtailing their nuclear capacity?
Russia has much to gain from Iran, but at this point what does Iran have to gain from Russia?
The only thing Iran wants or needs is the destruction of Israel and the only country that can give it to them either at once or piecemeal is the USA.
Iran will not listen to Russia but Iran can and will negotiate with Obama over USA's support for Israel; and Obama has already demonstrated that he is willing to listen to such discussions (Obama recently agreed to join the UN Human Rights Council; a body that spends its time accusing Israel of crimes againbt humanity. Obama is the first president to agree to join this anti-Semitic Council) and if he will listen to it, there is always the chance he will act on it. Obama has already acted in many ways to hinder and harm Israel.
Post a Comment
<< Home