Missile Defense (General thread)

[Beetle]

Obama to Shelve U.S. Missile Defense Plan

ABC News has learned that the Obama administration is adjusting plans for a missile defense shield in Europe by scrapping plans to base sites in Poland and the Czech Republic in favor of a more flexible, shorter-range system that would counter a potential short- or mid-range Iranian missile threat to Europe.

The move will surely be welcomed by Russia, which has long opposed the plan originally conceived under the Bush administration. Russian President Dmitri Medvedev and his predecessor Vladimir Putin had opposed the U.S. plan to base components in Poland and the Czech Republic, claiming they were designed to counter Russia instead of Iran.
A senior U.S. official says the administration is "adjusting and enhancing the planned missile defense in Europe," adding that intelligence now suggests that the Iranian missile threat to Europe is focused more on short and medium range missiles rather than from long-range missiles currently under development.

Another U.S. official said, "This improvement to the system has nothing to do with Russia and everything to do with Iran."
As originally planned under the Bush administration the missile defense plan would have placed a missile radar system in the Czech Republic and 10 long-range missile interceptors in Poland. Both countries had actively sought the placement of the system in their countries.

The U.S. already has long-range missile interceptors at Fort Greeley, Alaska, and Vandenberg Air Force Base in California that are focused on a potential North Korean long-range missile threat.
The Obama administration's proposal will favor "a flexible system" that will cover all of Europe by deploying multiple systems that won't be anchored to one spot.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates and vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. James Cartwright will brief reporters this morning at the Pentagon to discuss the details of the shift in plans.
The timing of the announcement is noteworthy. Next week President Obama will spend the better part of four days in New York City, much of it at the United Nations where on Thursday he will personally chair a Security Council Summit on non-proliferation.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Inter...d=ESPNheadline

I think we can add this to Rick's list.

[Beetle]

Hey Ryan,

I just saw your missile defense thread. You can delete this or move it or what ever, fi you want. Sorry about that.

[Ryan Ruck]

Went ahead and merged your thread into this one.

[Beetle]

Thanks Ryan and sorry about that!

[Ryan Ruck]

LOL! Didn't realize I had moved the entire thread to the News forum. It's back in the US Military forum now.

[vector7]

U.S. to Shelve Nuclear-Missile Shield

WASHINGTON -- The White House will shelve Bush administration plans to build a missile-defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic, according to people familiar with the matter, a move likely to cheer Moscow and roil the security debate in Europe.

The U.S. will base its decision on a determination that Iran's long-range missile program has not progressed as rapidly as previously estimated, reducing the threat to the continental U.S. and major European capitals, according to current and former U.S. officials.


Getty Images An Iranian Shahab-3 ballistic missile launches

The findings, expected to be completed as early as next week following a 60-day review ordered by President Barack Obama, would be a major reversal from the Bush administration, which pushed aggressively to begin construction of the Eastern European system before leaving office in January.

The Bush administration proposed the European-based system to counter the perceived threat of Iran developing a nuclear weapon that could be placed atop its increasingly sophisticated missiles. There is widespread disagreement over the progress of Iran's nuclear program toward developing such a weapon, but miniaturizing nuclear weapons for use on long-range missiles is one of the most difficult technological hurdles for an aspiring nuclear nation.

The Bush plan infuriated the Kremlin, which argued the system was a potential threat to its own intercontinental ballistic missiles. U.S. officials repeatedly insisted the location and limited scale of the system -- a radar site in the Czech Republic and 10 interceptor missiles in Poland -- posed no threat to Russian strategic arms.

The Obama administration's assessment concludes that U.S. allies in Europe, including members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, face a more immediate threat from Iran's short- and medium-range missiles and will order a shift towards the development of regional missile defenses for the Continent, according to people familiar with the matter. Such systems would be far less controversial.

Previously

• U.S. Willing to Roll Back Missile-Defense Plans in Europe
  03/03/09
• Opinion: Obama's Missile Test
  02/09/09

Critics of the shift are bound to view it as a gesture to win Russian cooperation with U.S.-led efforts to seek new economic sanctions on Iran if Tehran doesn't abandon its nuclear program. Russia, a permanent member of the U.N. Security Council, has opposed efforts to impose fresh sanctions on Tehran.

Security Council members, which include the U.S. and Russia, will meet with Iranian negotiators on Oct. 1 to discuss Iran's nuclear program.
Current and former U.S. officials briefed on the assessment's findings said the administration was expected to leave open the option of restarting the Polish and Czech system if Iran makes advances in its long-range missiles in the future.

But the decision to shelve the defense system is all but certain to raise alarms in Eastern Europe, where officials have expressed concerns that the White House's effort to "reset" relations with Moscow would come at the expense of U.S. allies in the former Soviet bloc. "The Poles are nervous," said a senior U.S. military official.

A Polish official said his government wouldn't "speculate" on administration decisions regarding missile defense, but said "we expect the U.S. will abide by its commitments" to cooperate with Poland militarily in areas beyond the missile-defense program.

Last week, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said he expected the Obama administration to drop the missile-defense plans. He said that Moscow wouldn't view the move as a concession but rather a reversal of a mistaken Bush-era policy.

Still, the decision is likely to be seen in Russia as a victory for the Kremlin. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev will meet with Mr. Obama at next week's meetings of the U.N. General Assembly and Group of 20 industrialized and developing nations.

Although a center-right government in Prague supported the Bush missile-defense plan when it was first proposed, the Czech Republic is now run by a caretaker government. A Czech official said his government was concerned an announcement by the White House on the missile-defense program could influence upcoming elections and has urged a delay. But the Obama administration has decided to keep to its original timetable.

European analysts said the administration would be forced to work hard to convince both sides the decision wasn't made to curry favor with Moscow and, instead, relied only on the program's technical merits and analysis of Iran's missile capabilities.

"There are two audiences: the Russians and the various European countries," said Sarah Mendelson, a Russia expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "The task is: How do they cut through the conspiracy theories in Moscow?"

The Obama administration has been careful to characterize its review as a technical assessment of the threat posed by the Iranian regime, as well as the costs and capabilities of a ground-based antimissile system to complement the two already operating in Alaska and central California. Those West Coast sites are meant to defend against North Korean missiles.

The administration has also debated offering Poland and the Czech Republic alternative programs to reassure the two NATO members that the U.S. remains committed to their defense.

Poland, in particular, has lobbied the White House to deploy Patriot missile batteries -- the U.S. Army's primary battlefield missile-defense system -- manned by American troops as an alternative.

Although Polish officials supported the Bush plan, U.S. officials said they had indicated their primary desire was getting U.S. military personnel on Polish soil. Gen. Carter Hamm, commander of U.S. Army forces in Europe, said Washington has begun talks with Polish officials about starting to rotate Europe-based American Patriot units into Poland for month-long training tours as a first step toward a more permanent presence.

"My position has been: Let's get started as soon as we can with the training rotations, while the longer-term stationing...is decided between the two governments," Gen. Hamm said in an interview.

For several years, the Pentagon's Missile Defense Agency has been pushing for breaking ground in Poland and the Czech Republic, arguing that construction must begin so the system would be in place to counter Tehran's emerging long-range-missile program, which intelligence assessments determined would produce an effective rocket by about 2015.

But in recent months, several prominent experts have questioned that timetable. A study by Russian and U.S. scientists published in May by the East-West Institute, an international think tank, downplayed the progress of Iran's long-range-missile program. In addition, Gen. James Cartwright, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and an expert in missile defense and space-based weapons, said in a speech last month that long-range capabilities of both Iran and North Korea "are not there yet."

"We believed that the emergence of the intercontinental ballistic missile would come much faster than it did," Gen. Cartwright said. "The reality is, it has not come as fast as we thought it would come."

It is not an assessment that is shared universally. Eric Edelman, who oversaw missile-defense issues at the Pentagon as undersecretary of defense for policy in the Bush administration, said intelligence reports he reviewed were more troubling.

"Maybe something really dramatic changed between Jan. 16 and now in terms of what the Iranians are doing with their missile system, but I don't think so," Mr. Edelman said, referring to his last day in office.
There is far more consensus on Iran's ability to develop its short- and medium-range missiles, and the administration review is expected to recommend a shift in focus toward European defenses against those threats. Such a program would be developed closely with NATO.


—Marc Champion in Moscow contributed to this article.

[vector7]

Missile Defense and Washington’s Foolish Eurasia Strategy

Politics / GeoPolitics Sep 17, 2009 - 06:41 AM By: F_William_Engdahl



Eight months into the Obama Presidency the outlines of Administration foreign policy are becoming very clear and what is emerging is a foreign policy establishment flying blind on automatic pilot, evidently unable to make the fundamental policy changes required of its new geopolitical and economic position in the world since the collapse of the Greenspan “revolution in finance” September 2008.

For the first time since it emerged as the world’s dominant power after 1945 the US policy establishment is unable to combine its military “stick” with any economic “carrot.” The Obama effort marks the end of an era of geopolitics. Latest reports that Obama has decided to cancel US plans for an anti-nuclear missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic suggest that a major internal battle is underway among US policy elites over what has clearly been a failed US foreign policy strategy.



Nowhere has the deficit in creative new strategic thinking been evident than in Washington policy towards the three pivot powers of the Eurasian continent—China, Russia and Iran. The recent calculated affront to Russia by Vice President Joe Biden was typical of the impotence of recent US foreign policy to regain American advantage across the strategic expanse of Eurasia—the undisputed “key” to world hegemony.

White the Obama Administration has made big fanfare about a so-called “reset” of US-Russian relations, it is clear the reset intended is back to the disastrous (for Russia) Yeltsin era of chaos and collapse of Russian state power in the early 1990’s. What is ignored are the clear strategic-based reasons for the dramatic deterioration in US-Russian relations—Washington and Washington-led NATO have posed an existential challenge to the very survival of Russia as a nation by Washington’s series of power coups or “color revolutions,” most clearly the 2003-2004 revolutions in Ukraine and in Georgia which placed pro-NATO de facto puppet regimes in power on Moscow’s most strategic periphery.

The strategic significance of “missile defense”
Adding to the appearance as seen from Moscow that US intent is to ultimately destroy Russia was the US insistence, until now endorsed by Obama, to place highly offensive missile and radar installations into Poland and the Czech Republic, the mis-named US “ballistic missile defense.” As former US military experts have put it, missile defense is the key to nuclear first strike. Whether or not Obama definitively cancels the missile defense plans will be a decisive indication if serious US rethinking is possible or not.

Rather than take steps to reduce the danger of nuclear pre-emptive war by miscalculation, a danger which the Bush-Rumsfeld missile defense policy has created with Russia, the Obama foreign policy has been drafted by an outmoded Clinton-era policy group whose calculations are based on a triumphal US sole superpower able to dictate terms to Russia and the rest of the world.



This was most clear in the ill-conceived Biden interview with the neo-conservative Wall Street Journal at end of July during a visit to Georgia and Ukraine. He proclaimed that Russia had “a shrinking population base, they have a withering economy, they have a banking sector and structure that is not likely to be able to withstand the next 15 years, they’re in a situation where the world is changing before them and they’re clinging to something in the past that is not sustainable.” It might as well have been describing the United States but for the population base.

The comments of the US Vice President, clearly approved beforehand by the White House, are read in Moscow as a US policy affirmation of crushing what remains of Russia. Even if there were some truth in the Biden coment, it far from defines the reality of Eurasian geopolitics today.

The fact that after Obama’s July meeting with Medvedev and Putin, Obama sent Biden on the provocative tour of Ukraine and Georgia made clear to Russia what Washington policy offers: nothing but negative consequences for Russia. Obama policy towards Russia was clearly nothing fundamentally different from Bush policy. As seen then in Moscow, it was a bankrupt US strategic policy, one on “automatic pilot.”

That policy, it was clear, would produce significant reactions globally that Washington was and is ill-prepared to counter, further underscoring the impotence of the United States as the global superpower. By declaring openly that Russia is not taken seriously by Washington, Biden and the Obama Administration revealed an arrogance not backed by strength in their own economic power. Russia has significant options to undercut America’s geopolitical strategy of divide-and-rule over Eurasia. Key are Russian relations with Iran, Afghanistan and China.

Washington strategy backfires
Obama strategy has been to re-establish US influence in parts of Eurasia that suffered dramatic decline during the fiasco of the Bush-Cheney era. This was evident in Obama plans to significantly pour more troops into Afghanistan. It was evident in covert US Administration support for regime change and destabilization of the Ahmedinejad government after the Iranian elections. There the goal was to weaken Iran influence in the Middle East as well as its close ties to China and Russia.

Were Washington truly able to rethink fundamentals of its geopolitical power projection it would take very different steps under the cover of the Obama regime change.

Rather than continuing the confrontation with Russia in its own security sphere of Georgia or Ukraine, it would have to consider making concessions to Russian security concerns by negotiating an end to the US missile defense as Obama suggested in the campaign debates.

The fact that the Czech press suggests that has just been decided, indicates a desperate internal attempt within the US power establishment to rethink fundamentals of America’s global strength.

Cancelling missile defense and easing of NATO support in Ukraine and Georgia would open the door to urgently needed Russian cooperation for a US policy with Iran and Afghanistan.

By being confrontational with Russia, Obama’s Administration had foolishly compounded its problems across Eurasia and beyond. Ironically, the US Government has just released its latest threat review.

The US 2009 National Intelligence Strategy (NIS), a four-year blueprint for the intelligence services, cites Russia, China, Iran and North Korea as countries that "have the ability to challenge US interests," not only in traditional ways, such as military force and espionage, but also in "emerging" ways, in particular cyber operations. It noted, "Russia…may continue to seek avenues for reasserting power and influence in ways that complicate US interests."

The Obama Biden policy of denigration and confrontation, if continued, no matter how weak Russia might appear economically, would certainly make that challenge to US influence a self-fulfilling prophesy.

The fact that Ahmadinejad personally went to the Yekaterinburg, Russia annual meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) in July amid the height of the US-led destabilization of his country, to talk with Russian and Chinese leaders, indicates the effect of Washington’s bankrupt foreign policy. Iran is the key factor to help politically stabilize Iraq where some 60% of the population is Shi’ite as in Iran. Russia could play a key role in stabilizing Iran where Russian technology is building the Bushehr nuclear power complex. As well, a less confrontational US policy might win cooperation of Iran in neutralizing problems in Afghanistan.

Significantly, only days after the Biden remarks about Russia, Russian newsmedia reported that Iran would receive an advanced Russian-made S-300 anti-aircraft system by the year's end that could help fend off any pre-emptive strikes against its nuclear facilities. The first deliveries are to begin this month and be completed within 12 months.

The announcement so destabilized the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu that the Prime Minister just made a rush trip to Moscow to try to stop the sale.

Moscow has been diplomatically and militarily able to create a serious weakening of US influence in Africa and as well in Latin America.
President Dmitry Medvedev visited four African countries in June – Egypt, Namibia, Nigeria and Angola.

As well, Moscow has just agreed with Venezuelan President Hugh Chavez to provide $2.5 billion line of credit to purchase Russian armoured vehicles and surface-to-air missiles. Chavez also said he expects arrival of some ''little rockets'' from Russia, which he said have a range of up to 300 kilometres and were strictly for defence purposes.

Chavez cited recent Colombian government decision to permit the US military access to seven military bases on its soil as justification. ''With these rockets, it is going to be very difficult for them to come and bomb us. If that happens, they should know that we will soon have these systems installed…”

Far from being an irrelevant player, as Biden and Obama were earlier prepared to declare, Russia is a decisive strategic factor in what is a growing move across the world to lessen dependence on the United States as “sole superpower.” The evident decision by Washington now to rethink its missile defense provocation of Russia indicates some in the Administration realize the US military bluff has been called. Now it remains to be seen if Washington is also willing to roll back its demand that Ukraine and Georgia join NATO. Were that to happen, it could signal a major US shift in strategic policy.

By F. William Engdahl
www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net

*F. William Engdahl, author of Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order (Third Millennium Press), may be reached via his website, www.engdahl.oilgeopolitics.net.

COPYRIGHT © 2009 F. William Engdahl. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

[vector7]

Medvedev: US missile plan decision 'responsible'


Posted: Thursday, September 17, 2009 12:20 pm | No Comments Posted

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said Thursday that the decision by the Obama administration to scrap plans for a missile defense system in Europe is a "responsible move."

Medvedev made the comments on state TV just hours after President Barack Obama announced he was shelving the project, which has been a major irritant in U.S. relations with Russia.

He said he and Obama had discussed the issue of missile proliferation in their meetings earlier this year in London and Moscow and had agreed to work together to reduce that risk.

"The announcement made today in Washington shows that the conditions for such work are not bad," he said.

"We appreciate this responsible move by the U.S. president toward realizing our agreement," he said. "I am prepared to continue the dialogue."

Russia has strenuously objected to the plan to base the missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic, fearing it would compromise Russia's strategic nuclear capabilities.

"We together will work out effective measures regarding the risks of missile proliferation _ measures, which will take into consideration the interests and concerns of all sides and guarantee equal security to all states in Europe," Medvedev said.

Posted in Europe on Thursday, September 17, 2009 12:20 pm Updated: 1:07 pm. | Tags:

[American Patriot]

Heard the President's decisions today?

MDA being pulled out of Europe.

We're done for.

[American Patriot]

This was a DANGEROUS and NAIVE DECISION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama has DOOMED the United States.

John Titor... I am beginning to believe was "here before his time".

[vector7]

Analysis: Barack Obama's missile shield decision will be cheered in Russia

The Kremlin will allow itself a wry smile today. Reports that Barack Obama has scrapped plans for a missile defence shield in Eastern Europe are music to its ears.

By Andrew Osborn in Moscow
Published: 1:29PM BST 17 Sep 2009


Barack Obama's new approach marks a significant change in American diplomacy Photo: GETTY

Tomorrow's Russian newspapers are therefore likely to be triumphalist in tone. "See, we were right to give the Americans a hard time on this" will be the line.

The climb-down undoubtedly does represent a significant strategic victory for the Kremlin. It also gives substance to Washington's so far woolly "reset" of relations with Russia, and will go a long way to soothe wounded Russian egos.

Related Articles

• US economy will take 'years' to return to pre-recession level, Paul Volcker warns
• Anger in Europe as Obama 'scraps missile shield'
• Barack Obama shows Chicago's fighting spirit
• US to scrap European missile defence shield
• Barack Obama can't make rogues like North Korea play by his rules
• Barack Obama offers to scrap US missile defence system in secret letter to Russia

Moscow's biggest complaint about the Bush administration was that it did not take Russia or Russian strategic interests seriously. There is nothing Russians hate more than to think that their old Cold War adversary is not giving them the respect they believe they are due. This therefore will be held up as proof to ordinary Russians that Russia is once again a serious player on the world stage. It will become part of the "Russia rises from its knees" narrative so beloved of Kremlin spin doctors in the blink of an eye.

The Kremlin is not known for missing opportunities to pat itself on the back and this particular propaganda coup has been served up on a plate with all the trimmings. The crowing could be loud. The reflected glory will go to Vladimir Putin. The prime minister has been the missile shield's most vocal and high profile opponent, drawing on some of his famously fiery rhetoric to reject the US plan. This news will serve to bolster his already stellar popularity ratings, cementing his position as Russia's most powerful politician and heavyweight international statesman.

Russia's diplomatic elite will see it as a vindication of Moscow's publicly uncompromising stance on the issue.

Russia effectively staked its entire bilateral relationship with the US on the dispute in a high stakes game of poker that appears to have paid off. At a time when Moscow obviously needs to be more flexible itself, there must be concerns that it will be tempted to resort to the same successful hardball tactics again.

In Eastern Europe, there is likely to be real anxiety and soul-searching.
Many politicians in the missile shield's putative host countries – Poland and the Czech Republic – will undoubtedly feel jilted and let down by Washington. Former Soviet bloc countries had already begun to voice concerns that Washington's vaunted reset of relations with Moscow would come at their expense. For many, this move is likely to be seen as a disappointing confirmation of that. Washington could be busy mending fences and reassuring some of is staunchest European allies about its future intentions for months to come.

The big question now though is what if anything is Russia ready to do in return? Washington has a meaty wish list. It wants Russia to back tough sanctions against Iran to curb the Islamic Republic's nuclear alleged ambitions. It would also like Russia to make deep cuts in its own nuclear arsenal when it comes to renegotiating a key arms control treaty due to expire in December.

And last, but not least, it wants Russia's continued cooperation in helping Washington keep its troops in Afghanistan well supplied. Iran will be the toughest issue to crack. The Russian government has so far appeared split on the sanctions issue with Mr Putin strongly opposing the idea and President Dmitry Medvedev apparently remaining open to such a demarche.

Will the Russians be magnanimous in victory? Or will they, as the foreign minister Sergei Lavrov has said in the past, choose to frame the decision as an overdue correction of a Bush era mistake rather than as a real concession that requires reciprocity.
That is the 64,000 ruble question.

[vector7]

Yep, the Left when in power continues to make geopolitical and military strategic moves that destroys our national security along with our credibility.

There may have been a trade made for Russian short term support against Iran for a long term Eastern Europe withdrall.

One hasty naive move in a chess game can have serious hidden consequences. This will only strengthen and embolden our enemies.

[vector7]

Russia unlikely to offer concessions in response to U.S. halting of missile shield

Moscow had been anticipating Obama's decision, which it sees as correcting an error. Its Iran policy is not expected to change.

By Megan K. Stack September 18, 2009

Reporting from Moscow - When President Obama came to Moscow in July, he hinted that Russia's best chance to stop the U.S. from building a missile shield in the region was to help stifle Iran's nuclear ambitions.

Russia got what it wanted Thursday: The United States dropped plans for missile shield facilities in Poland and the Czech Republic. But if Moscow's initial reaction is any measure, Washington should not expect much in return.

Russian officials have been anticipating the U.S. decision, and regard it as proof that the United States has finally come to its senses. The Americans, one Russian official said, shouldn't demand rewards for finally fixing a mistake.

In recent weeks, Moscow has come under increasing pressure from the U.S. and Israel to take a harder line against Iran's nuclear program. But Russia doesn't feel particularly threatened by a nuclear Iran, analysts say. Instead, the Kremlin tends to treat Iran as an economic opportunity. And it embraces the Islamic Republic as a powerful nation hostile to the United States.

The Kremlin had badly wanted the Obama administration to drop plans to deploy the missile interceptors and radar equipment in countries that once were part of the Soviet sphere of influence. But that doesn't mean Russian officials were willing to characterize the shift in policy as a concession.

"Those who are talking about a concession to Russia are primarily those who are looking for a bargaining chip in seeking extra dividends of some kind from us," said Dmitry Rogozin, Russia's envoy to NATO, in remarks carried on the Interfax news agency. "In actual fact, the Americans have simply put their own mistake right. And we are not duty-bound to pay for someone to put their own mistakes right."

From the start, Moscow was enraged by the George W. Bush administration's proposal to build the missile installations. Russian officials rejected U.S. explanations that the facilities would be a deterrent to Iranian weapons, instead viewing them as a menacing show of force and an attempt to curb Russian military might.

Some of the early strains of goodwill toward Obama stirred in Russia when he, as a presidential candidate, expressed skepticism about the effectiveness of the proposed Eastern European installations.

Russia's Iran policy has never been straightforward. In recent weeks, Russia and Israel have held high-level meetings on Iran. At the same time, Interfax quoted an anonymous Russian official as raising doubts about whether Iran had properly answered concerns about its nuclear program.

Russia has been firmly against imposing more sanctions on Iran, and that determination showed little sign of wavering Thursday.

"There is a real chance to start negotiations that should result in agreements . . . to restore confidence in the purely peaceful nature of this program," Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said. "It would be a serious mistake to kill off this chance with demands for immediate sanctions."

Some analysts say that, despite its official expressions of concern over whether Iran's nuclear program is peaceful, Moscow isn't particularly worried about whether Tehran is pursuing atomic weapons.

"Neither Iranian nor North Korean nuclear weapons were ever a big issue here, because they're not seen as a direct threat against Russia," said Pavel Felgenhauer, a Moscow-based analyst with the Jamestown Foundation.

In a sense, the tensions between the West and Iran have been beneficial for Moscow, lending it a badly desired sense of diplomatic clout. For years, Russia has remained essentially noncommittal as it was courted by both sides.

Under Vladimir Putin, first as president and now as prime minister, Russia has returned to a semblance of the Cold War practice of cultivating ties with anti-American countries. Among them are Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea. Iran fits neatly into that pattern, and Russia has also benefited from lucrative business deals, including the construction of a nuclear power plant in Iran.

With the debate over a nuclear Iran coming to a head, analysts predict that hard-liners and more conciliatory factions of Russia's political elite will each seize upon the shift in missile shield policy to try to bolster their cause.

"There is an intense fight about which direction the country should take," said Andrei Kortunov, president of the New Eurasia Foundation in Moscow. "Whether Russia is going to integrate into the so-called civilized world or put together a coalition of global misfits and radicals."

megan.stack@latimes.com

[vector7]

Russia Is a New Powder Keg: NATO Missile Program

By SOP newswire2

The move by U.S. investors making headlines today ago to abandon plans to construct an intercept missile shield program and radar center in Eastern Europe may improve relations with Russia, but many things must fall into place carefully for western interests to benefit from the "Nutcracker Market" setting. Be warned that many new risks will be present-- risks which do not currently exist in their present form.



Vladimir Putin will most likely be President of Russia again in 2012. He was educated in Soviet Republic National Security and economic development before working for the KGB. His doctoral thesis was about how to control the entire world economy with Russia`s rich natural resources, particularly in energy " ( both hydro-carbon and nuclear).

Putin is a logical answer to Russia`s woes for a second time in an effort to recover national strength. Weakness, as the greatest sin of all, sits at the very core of Vladimir Putin`s philosophy of life. He told Russians after the Beslan school massacre, "Weak people are beaten always. "

The cancellation of the NATO missile shield program removes the bridle and the reins that contain and counter Russian influence against eastern Europe and the CIS nations, making Russia stronger and later positioned as the dominant offensive strategist in both economic and ground warfare, because Russia will construct a missile program as soon as they are positioned, as their own. Putin may need the armament for what potential investment will create on the surface of the world`s increasingly rare, remaining oil reserves and (present and proposed) pipeline infrastructures.

The present administration`s weak state of positioning must be understood in order to predict their procession: At present, President Medvedev`s administration has been plagued with the country`s economic deficiencies, weak institutions being used as corruption clearinghouses (an estimated 41% of their cash flow is for bribes), social and health problems (alcoholism and the world`s highest per capita Afghan heroin addiction), and failure to contain a spreading Islamic insurgency in the Caucasus. The two men could have been characters in a "A Tale of Two Countries " is the latest joke among the intelligence community.

President Medvedev has not formulated an effective policy in the Northern Caucasus. Russia`s real war there is a war against corruption in the republics. Until Moscow improves there will be no improvement. A large question looms among Russian analysts, "Who is selling weapons to the extremists in the Northern Caucasus? "

The Federal Security Service (FSB) has been suggested that it investigate Iran for supporting terrorist activities in Chechnya and Ingushetia. This advice came in the form of a solid warning to Russia they must NOT join the U.S. led anti-Iranian coalition as they pointed out that Turkey has been stronger than Medvedev as a puppet master in the Caucasus lately. Russia is even being encouraged by moderate Islamics to create a joint anti-terrorist pact with Turkey. Turkey is a hero to the Abkhazian economy by opening up trade with the Abkhazian Republic: they think that if Medvedev uses their new trade model then he might successfully persuade other moderate Islamic states to invest directly in the economies of the North Caucasus, opening a Russian/Islamic free trade zone there. As an alternative to growing terror. The increase of Islamic terrorism is not confined to Russia`s southern flank. It is global and has been described as the biggest threat to European civilization. Russia must join forces on a much larger and broader scale. If NATO loses the war in Afghanistan, Islamic insurgence into Russia on behalf of terrorist groups will increase with their presence. Russia says we cannot win. In fact the Russian Ambassador has warned the U.S., do not send more troops or you will make the problems bigger.

Rule of law to deter terrorism is categorically exercised by active preventive strategies and deterrence, and sanctioned with pin-point retribution. So Russia, Turkey, the European Union, and the United States have determined that it is preferable to make trade, not war.

Swift and shrewd moves away from Bush policy will create trade options that recover and manage assets lost or for sale by Russian oligarchs, all downed by the rapid world market implosion last year (2008), having over-leveraged themselves in efforts to monopolize the world market. Forecasters say that the economic influence compressed into the hands by a dozen or so oligarchs who emerged in the rapid sell-off of state property in the post-Soviet 1990s, will land in the hands of hundreds of entrepreneurs within the next two to three
years.

This is an interesting and complex scenario because the West will not present a NATO protection program in Eastern Europe or the CIS countries after all. Russia is unleashed to be reckoned with, however; who will own distressed Russian assets will change quickly. "How much of Russia will Islam buy?" becomes a big question. They are big enough to get their money back--in ground wars if necessary--while we cannot afford another ground war. Moscow announced plans to construct over 200 mosques throughout Russia in 2008. Will this new opportunity for Western presence be devoured by Western investors at their additional peril, and if so, how can the same corruption patterns be halted, corruption that undermined or expropriated investment and businesses in banking, energy, etc. as State-owned under Putin? We wanted the NATO missile program to rein in Russian strategic dominance, the brainchild and culmination of Putin himself, because we watched Russia hoodwink the Western investor for $1.1 trillion [usd] within 9 years.

My guess is that Putin does and will want nuclear armament on their borders, as the OFFENSIVE party, not defense, and stopping NATO is a major and monumental task to that effect. The Russian population of approximately 141 million cannot conduct ground wars ever again. Nor can the Pentagon or Western investors afford it, unless what they really want is a huge ground war at any cost with Islam. Russia has taken great national pride knowing that during the cold war it was only their acquisition of the nuclear weapon that prevented the terror and destruction of World War III.

Sincerely,

A.L. Lamar

Chairwoman

A.L. Lamar Wind Energy Technology
angelalamar@execs.com

[Beetle]

Obama helps strengthen General Electric-Putin ties

By: Timothy P. Carney
Examiner Columnist
09/17/09 2:06 PM EDT


Reuters reports an interesting nugget in the wake of President Barack Obama's decision to grant Vladimir Putin his wish and kill the Eastern European missile shield:

Shortly after the pullback on the shield programme was announced, Russia's government said Prime Minister Vladimir Putin would meet several U.S. executives on Friday from firms including General Electric, Morgan Stanley as well as TPG, one of the world's largest private equity firms
General Electric may be the company with the closest ties to the Obama administration (if not, GE is second only to Goldman Sachs), and here we see the company benefiting from an abrupt foreign policy change made by President Obama. But GE isn't the only company benefiting. Reuters paints the broader picture

U.S. companies have arguably lost out to some European companies in joint ventures, and better diplomacy will likely improve the chances for investors in the strategic sectors of the Russian economy," said Carlo Gallo, senior Russia analyst at London-based consultancy Control Risks.
GE CEO Jeff Immelt sits on Obama's Economic Recovery Advisory Board, and GE owns MSNBC, the network famously friendly to Obama.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/op...-59644627.html

[vector7]

Thursday, September 17, 2009
Abandoning the Third Site Harms America’s Allies and Decreases Security

[Mackenzie Eaglen]

So President Obama has axed the agreement with America’s allies in eastern Europe and abandoned the so-called “third site” missile-defense plan.

It’s hard to determine which is worse:

• the lame excuse that Iran’s nuclear program isn’t progressing as rapidly as before (Just this week the U.S. ambassador to the IAEA said Iran now has “possible breakout capacity” to enrich and convert its uranium stockpile to bomb-grade material) or,

• that U.S. leaders would sell out our friends for Russia whose own leaders just said they won’t push for tougher sanctions against Iran.

This betrayal of allies comes as America continues to press NATO allies to do more in Afghanistan. Earlier this year Poland sent even more troops to Afghanistan to help with the recent election. So too, the Czech Republic is running a large Provincial Reconstruction Team and advising the Afghanistan Air Corps today.

It’s rumored that White House officials think they can limit the damage by providing the Poles and Czechs with a lesser capability, possibly through Aegis sea-based missile defense and potential land-based missiles. But the SM-3 interceptors are not yet ready for prime-time.

The ramifications of dumping the third site deployment will reach far beyond Warsaw and Prague. The Heritage Foundation’s Sally McNamara notes: this is “a decision on which the future of the transatlantic security alliance itself rests. If the United States chooses to abandon its Central and Eastern European allies as well as its obligations to NATO, it will hand the European Union a blank check to pursue an autonomous defense identity, independent of NATO, and will reduce America's influence within the transatlantic alliance significantly.”

— Mackenzie Eaglen is the Heritage Foundation’s research fellow for National Security Studies.

[vector7]

Reuters
Russian PM Putin to meet U.S. businessmen

09.17.09, 11:35 AM EDT RUSSIA-PUTIN/USA:Russian PM Putin to meet U.S. businessmen

MOSCOW, Sept 17 (Reuters) - Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin will meet several top U.S. executives on Friday, including General Electric Co and Morgan Stanley, the Russian government said on Thursday.
Putin's meetings with top Western executives are usually a precursor of major business deals. Earlier this year oil majors Total and Royal Dutch Shell ( RDSA - news - people ) announced plans to expand in Russia at meetings with Putin.

Talks with the U.S. firms follow a U.S. government decision to halt the deployment of a missile shield defence system in Europe, a move received positively by the Russian government.

The press service said Putin would meet David Bonderman, founding partner of one of the world's largest private equity firms, TPG, and the chief executive of General Electric Co ( GE - news - people ), Jeff Immelt.

Putin will meet the executives in Russia's Black Sea resort of Sochi, which is hosting an investment forum. He will also hold talks with John Mack, who is to quit as CEO of Morgan Stanley ( MS - news - people ) at the start of 2010.

Last week, sources told Reuters that TPG, formerly known as Texas Pacific Group and the private equity arm of Russian state bank VTB bought a large stake in Russian hypermarket chain Lenta.

General Electric has announced plans to build new plants in Russia, while Morgan Stanley has had a continuous investment banking presence in the country since 1994. (Reporting by Gleb Bryanski; writing by Vladimir Soldatkin; editing by Simon Jessop)

Copyright 2009 Reuters, Click for Restriction

[vector7]

Putin Seeks Trade Concessions After U.S. Missile Move

By Paul Abelsky and Lyubov Pronina

Sept. 18 (Bloomberg) -- Prime Minister Vladimir Putin called for trade concessions, including an end to restrictions on technology transfers to Russia, following U.S. President Barack Obama’s decision to abandon a missile shield in Europe.

“I’m counting on other decisions to follow this correct and brave decision, including the complete elimination of restrictions on cooperation with Russia and on transfers of high technology to Russia as well as an intensification of World Trade Organization expansion to include Russia, Belarus and Kazakhstan,” Putin said at a business forum in Sochi today.

Obama yesterday said he was scrapping the missile-system proposal, championed by his predecessor George W. Bush in the face of Russian opposition, in favor of a more flexible system better able to protect against threats to the U.S. and its European allies, primarily from Iran.

Putin announced in June that Russia would seek to join the WTO as part of a customs union with Belarus and Kazakhstan, a proposal that U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke called “not workable and unacceptable.” Medvedev said in July that Russia may join separately from its neighbors.

The U.S. maintains Cold War-era trade restrictions on Russia under the 1974 Jackson-Vanik amendment, imposed in response to Soviet limitations on Jewish emigration. Putin has called repeatedly for the U.S. to repeal the amendment.

‘Responsible’ Move
Russian President Dmitry Medvedev welcomed Obama’s “responsible” decision to abandon Bush’s plan for a radar installation in the Czech Republic and interceptor missiles in Poland. The plan contributed to the worst state of relations between Russia and the U.S. since the Cold War, even though the U.S. maintained the system wasn’t directed against Russia.

Medvedev issued a challenge hours after Obama’s election win in November, saying he’d deploy short-range Iskander missiles in the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad, wedged between Poland and Lithuania, to “neutralize” the U.S. system if it were built. Russia viewed the proposed system as a threat to its security.

A Kremlin official said Russia “will of course have to review” the proposed deployment in Kaliningrad after Obama’s announcement. The Interfax news service cited an unidentified diplomat as saying that Russia will “freeze” and may “cancel” the Iskander plan.

‘Stricter Sanctions’
In Washington, some lawmakers said Russia should respond to the U.S. initiative by backing Washington on Iran. Senator Chuck Schumer said it was time for the Russians “to join our push to impose stricter sanctions on Iran in order to halt its nuclear weapons program.”

Anders Fogh Rasmussen, secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, also called on Russia to drop its opposition to tighter sanctions against Iran. He urged the Kremlin to “join us in putting a maximum of political and diplomatic pressure on Iran to stop Iran’s nuclear aspirations.”

Russia, which is helping Iran build its first nuclear power plant at Bushehr, has a veto on the United Nations Security Council and has consistently opposed moves to isolate the country. Russia is also a member of the group of six countries addressing concerns about Iran’s nuclear program.

Medvedev said on Sept. 15 that sanctions are “not a very effective thing,” though “sometimes one must have recourse” to them. The comment, made in a meeting with international experts on Russia, struck some participants as more West-leaning than the line taken by Putin.

‘Harsher Line’
Sergei Prikhodko, an aide to Medvedev, said today that it would be wrong to speak of Russian “concessions” in response to the U.S. move.
“We have to engage Iran,” Dmitry Rogozin, Russia’s envoy to NATO, said in Brussels today. “The harsher words are pronounced as regards Iran, the more sanctions there are, the worse it is for all, because that could only stimulate a harsher line in Iran itself.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said yesterday that nuclear talks scheduled for Oct. 1 between Iran and the U.S., China, Russia, the U.K., France and Germany have a “real chance” of producing “agreements allowing for the restoration of confidence in the exclusively peaceful nature of Iran’s nuclear program,” Interfax reported.

Lavrov said that wasting this chance “by demanding the immediate imposition of sanctions” against Iran would be a “serious mistake,” the Moscow-based news service reported.

To contact the reporters on this story: Paul Abelsky in Sochi at pabelsky@bloomberg.net; Lyubov Pronina in Moscow at lpronina@bloomberg.net

Last Updated: September 18, 2009 10:36 EDT

[vector7]

Where is Hillary Clinton in the great missile defence surrender?

By Con Coughlin Defence Last updated: September 18th, 2009


Why has Hillary Clinton gone walkies? Photo: EPA

Excuse me, but when Washington announces a revolutionary change in the way it conducts its relations with the outside world it is normal for the American Secretary of State to be involved in some way.

So where’s Hillary Clinton? We’ve heard a lot from President Barack Obama and Robert Gates, the Defence Secretary, about their lamentable decision to abandon the missile defence system in Europe, which has been a key pillar of the transatlantic alliance for a decade or more. But we’ve heard not a squeak from Mrs Clinton.

Could this be that, unlike Mr Obama and Mr Gates, she sees this decision for what it is, an abject surrender of American influence in Europe, and a shocking betrayal of all those former vassal states of the Soviet Union that are desperately seeking the support and protection of the West?

Compared with Mr Obama and Mr Gates, whose first instinct when faced with an international crisis is to make concessions, Mrs Clinton is a more hard-headed and hawkish operator. She might want to “reset”

Washington’s relations with Moscow, but not at the expense of capitulating to Iran’s attempts to terrorise the world with its nuclear programme.

She, for one, will not be at all surprised that, within 24 hours of Mr Obama’s decision to abandon the missile defence system, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad appears on American television declaring that Tehran will never abandon its nuclear programme.

This is precisely the kind of response you can expect if you try to appease dictators, which is how Tehran will interpret the cancellation of the missile system. But I suspect Mrs Clinton has her own views on how to respond to this increased bellicosity from Iran, and it does not involve rolling over and having her tummy tickled by the mullahs.

[vector7]

Poles, Czechs: US missile defense shift a betrayal



By VANESSA GERA, Associated Press Writer Vanessa Gera, Associated Press Writer – Fri Sep 18, 8:10 am ET

WARSAW, Poland – Poles and Czechs voiced deep concern Friday at President Barack Obama's decision to scrap a Bush-era missile defense shield planned for their countries.

"Betrayal! The U.S. sold us to Russia and stabbed us in the back," the Polish tabloid Fakt declared on its front page.

Polish President Lech Kaczynski said he was concerned that Obama's new strategy leaves Poland in a dangerous "gray zone" between Western Europe and the old Soviet sphere.

Recent events in the region have rattled nerves throughout central and eastern Europe, a region controlled by Moscow during the Cold War, including the war last summer between Russia and Georgia and ongoing efforts by Russia to regain influence in Ukraine. A Russian cutoff of gas to Ukraine last winter left many Europeans without heat.

The Bush administration's plan would have been "a major step in preventing various disturbing trends in our region of the world," Kaczynski said in a guest editorial in the daily Fakt and also carried on his presidential Web site.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said he still sees a chance for Poles and Czechs to participate in the redesigned missile defense system. But that did not appear to calm nerves in Warsaw or Prague.

Kaczynski expressed hopes that the U.S. will now offer Poland other forms of "strategic partnership."

In Prague, Czech Foreign Minister Jan Kohout said he made two concrete proposal to U.S. officials on Thursday in hopes of keeping the U.S.-Czech alliance strong: for the U.S. to establish a branch of West Point for NATO members in Central Europe and to "send a Czech scientist on the U.S. space shuttle to the international space station."

An editorial in Hospodarske Novine, a respected pro-business Czech newspaper, said: "an ally we rely on has betrayed us, and exchanged us for its own, better relations with Russia, of which we are rightly afraid."

The move has raised fears in the two nations they are being marginalized by Washington even as a resurgent Russia leaves them longing for added American protection.

The Bush administration always said that the planned system — with a radar near Prague and interceptors in northern Poland — was meant as defense against Iran. But Poles and Czechs saw it as protection against Russia, and Moscow too considered a military installation in its backyard to be a threat.

"No Radar. Russia won," the largest Czech daily, Mlada Fronta Dnes, declared in a front-page headline.

Obama said the old plan was scrapped in part because the U.S. has concluded that Iran is less focused on developing the kind of long-range missiles for which the system was originally developed, making the building of an expensive new shield unnecessary.

The replacement system is to link smaller radar systems with a network of sensors and missiles that could be deployed at sea or on land. Some of the weaponry and sensors are ready now, and the rest would be developed over the next 10 years.

The Pentagon contemplates a system of perhaps 40 missiles by 2015, at two or three sites across Europe.
_____
Associated Press writer Karel Janicek contributed reporting from Prague.