Thread: NATO Allies Agree Missile Defense Necessary

I'm just glad we're not part of NATO then.

I trust the US, but I don't want anything like that on my country's soil.

Originally Posted by crooks

I don't want anything like that on my country's soil.

A defensive missile system?

Originally Posted by HistoricalDavid

A defensive missile system?

No, of course not.

Us putting something like that up would ATTRACT attention, not what we need nor want (neutral country).

Staying out of NATO was probably a wise decision imo.

Do we have to pay for this system?

Russia seems to be thinking otherwise.

Bloomberg.com: Europe

So, what is the answer?

Originally Posted by gunnut

Do we have to pay for this system?

I would imagine so.........but If I was you I'd be mighty ticked off about it.

Putin hawkish in final state-of-nation address


MOSCOW (Reuters) - Russian President Vladimir Putin attacked U.S. foreign policy and urged a revival of traditional values on Thursday in a hawkish speech that laid out a route for Russia to follow long after he steps down next year.

Making his last annual address to lawmakers, Putin said he was suspending Russia's commitments under the Conventional Forces in Europe treaty and linked the move in part to U.S. plans for a missile shield in eastern Europe.

He gave no clear answer to the question preoccupying Kremlin-watchers and investors -- who Putin would endorse as his replacement when his second and final term ends next March.

But he set the tone for Russia's next presidency, announcing a spending splurge on housing, pensions, defense and mammoth infrastructure projects including a canal to link the Caspian and Black Seas.

In a swipe at opposition groups who have taken to the streets alleging he is backtracking on democracy, the president railed at "extremists" and said foreign cash was being used to upset Russia's political stability.

However, the thread that ran through his 72-minute address was what he called Russia's moral state.

"Our nation's spiritual unity and the moral values which unite us are as important a factor in our development as political and economic stability," he said, urging greater efforts to preserve Russia's culture and language.

First deputy prime ministers Sergei Ivanov and Dmitry Medvedev, the men regarded as front-runners for Putin's job, sat side by side listening to the speech along with lawmakers, religious leaders and ministers in the Kremlin's Marble Hall.

Putin confirmed next year's address would be read by a different president. "It is premature for me to come out with political last wills and testaments," he added, to applause

In his seven years as Russian leader, Putin has overseen steady growth in incomes and a return to political stability after years of turmoil.

Soured dramatically

But relations with the United States have soured dramatically and his critics say he is turning Russia away from the West and tightening state control over all areas of life.

On the arms treaty, he said it made no sense for Russia to observe the pact when NATO signatories were ignoring it.

"(NATO countries) are ... building up military bases on our borders and, what's more, they are also planning to station elements of anti-missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic," Putin said.

"In this connection, I consider it expedient to declare a moratorium on Russia's implementation of this treaty -- in any case, until all countries of the world have ratified and started to strictly implement it."

.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice earlier dismissed as nonsense Moscow's concerns that the missile shield could pose a strategic threat to Russia.

Russia's windfall from oil and gas exports -- until now kept in a "rainy day" fund and spent sparingly -- should be mobilized to improve citizens' quality of life, Putin said.

He said pensions would rise 65 percent through to 2009 and that proceeds from the state-forced auction of bankrupt oil company YUKOS should go towards a house-building drive.

Russia needs to increase its power-generating capacity by two thirds by 2020, Putin said, including by building 26 new atomic reactors.

Dress rehearsal

Putin said a parliamentary election in December, widely regarded as a dress rehearsal for the presidential race, should ensure "continuity." He attacked unnamed political forces he said wanted to upset stability.

"There is a growing influx of foreign cash used to directly meddle in our domestic affairs," Putin said.

"Some people are not averse to using the dirtiest methods, trying to foment interethnic and religious hatred in our multinational country.

"In this respect, I am addressing you with a request to speed up the adoption of amendments to the legislation toughening punishment for extremist actions," he said.

Putin announced a minute of silence at the start of his address for his predecessor Boris Yeltsin, who died of heart failure aged 76 this week and was buried in a state funeral.

Monday, April 30, 2007

America mismanaging missile defense

By F. STEPHEN LARRABEE and ANDRZEJ KARKOSZKA

PRAGUE -- Missile defense has suddenly emerged as a divisive issue in Europe. Rather than enhancing European security, the Bush administration's plan to deploy elements of a missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic threatens to increase strains with Russia and deepen divisions with America's European allies, particularly those in Eastern Europe, where support for U.S. polices has been strongest.

The growing opposition to the U.S. missile defense deployment is rooted in the way in which America has managed -- or rather mismanaged -- the presentation of its deployment plans.

First, U.S. officials did not lay the political and psychological groundwork for deployment. They assumed that Czech and Polish leaders -- who were strongly pro-American -- would willingly agree to deployment, and that public opinion in both countries would go along with whatever the governments decided.

But America failed to develop a coherent public rationale for its planned deployment of a system designed to destroy a missile fired by a rogue regime. As a result, the Czech and Polish governments were unable to answer fundamental questions about the costs and benefits of the deployment for Polish and Czech national security. This allowed skeptics and opponents of missile defense to gain the upper hand in the internal debates in both countries.

Second, U.S. officials initially tended to view missile defense largely as a technological issue divorced from its political context. For most Europeans, however, the military-technical issues are less important than the broader political implications of deployment for European stability and security. The initial American briefings to European allies ignored this fact.

Third, America underestimated the role of public opinion in Poland and the Czech Republic. U.S. officials assumed that it was sufficient to have the consent of the governments and failed to recognize the degree to which these countries have become increasingly "Europeanized" in the last decade. Membership in the European Union has resulted in the proliferation of ties to Europe at many levels, as well as a major influx of EU money. This has had an enormous impact on public attitudes in Eastern Europe.

In Poland, a big gap exists between the government's attitude and that of the population regarding the EU. The Polish government is dominated by Euroskeptics and has pursued a highly nationalistic policy that has often antagonized EU officials. Ordinary Poles, by contrast, are strongly pro-European. According to recent polls, 80 percent of the population supports Poland's membership in the EU -- the highest in Europe.

Fourth, American officials have tended to assume that the countries of Eastern Europe will remain staunchly pro-American and automatically support U.S. policy. That was true five years ago, but it is much less true today. As Eastern European countries become more closely integrated into the EU, they increasingly have to calculate the impact of their policies on relations with Europe.

At the same time, the war in Iraq and abuses associated with it have tarnished America's image in Eastern Europe. This is true even in Poland, which is the most pro-American country in the region. The Polish government strongly supported the United States in Iraq, sending the third largest contingent of forces, after the U.S. and Great Britain. However, Polish public opinion, like public opinion in Western Europe, was overwhelmingly opposed to the Iraq invasion.

Moreover, many Poles feel they have little to show for the government's support. As former Polish Defense Minister Radek Sikorski noted recently, there is a sense among many Poles that the U.S. takes Poland for granted. Sikorski's argument shocked many U.S. officials, because he is considered one of the most pro-American politicians in Poland. But it reflects a widespread sentiment among many Poles, including those who are staunch supporters of close ties to the U.S.

Unlike the Iraq operation, the planned missile defense deployment will almost certainly require approval by the Polish Parliament. This approval cannot be taken for granted. The government will need to explain to a skeptical Polish population and Parliament why the deployment is in Poland's national interest -- not just America's interest -- and how it enhances Polish security. Simply saying, "because the Americans want it" will not be enough.

The U.S. can still win the missile debate in Europe, but only if it stops treating missile defense primarily as a technological issue and addresses the broader political concerns that are driving the debate among European publics, including those in Eastern Europe.
F. Stephen Larrabee holds the Corporate Chair in European Security at the RAND Corporation. Andrzej Karkoszka was state secretary for defense in Poland from l995-1998 and director of the Strategic Defense Review in the Polish Ministry of Defense from 2003-2006. Copyright Project Syndicate 2007. Project Syndicate
The Japan Times
America mismanaging missile defense | The Japan Times Online