Obama "Not Commited" To ABM site in Europe.

[TimothyC]

(CNN) -- U.S. President-elect Barack Obama has made "no commitment" to plans for a missile defense program in eastern Europe, despite a report on the Polish president's Web site, an Obama adviser said Saturday.

Obama spoke to President Lech Kaczynski over the phone about continuing military and political cooperation between the two countries and possibly meeting in person soon, both sides said.

Obama "had a good conversation with the Polish president and the Polish prime minister about the important U.S.-Poland alliance," said Denis McDonough, Obama's senior foreign policy adviser.

However, Kaczynski's office says on its Web site that during the same conversation, Obama told Kaczynski that he intends to continue plans for a missile shield in eastern Europe.

Obama's adviser denied the report.

"President Kaczynski raised missile defense, but President-elect Obama made no commitment on it. His position is as it was throughout the campaign: that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable," McDonough said.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin said Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Obama also had a phone conversation and agreed to meet soon.

"During the discussion, both sides emphasized that relations between Russia and the USA are priority ones for both parties and that their positive development is crucial not only for the peoples of the two countries but also for the wider international community," a statement from the Kremlin said.

Russia has been infuriated by U.S. plans for the missile-defense installation, which includes basing missile interceptors in Poland. The interceptor rockets would be linked to an air-defense radar system in the Czech Republic.

The United States has tried to mollify Russia by stressing that the missile defense is directed at rogue states, such as Iran, and that the number of interceptors in the shield would be "easily overwhelmed" by Russian forces.

Medvedev, in his first state-of-the-nation speech since taking office this year, warned this week that Russian missiles will be deployed against the planned system.

"The Iskander missile system will be deployed in Kaliningrad region to neutralize, when necessary, the missile shield," Medvedev said. "We are also planning to use the resources of the Russian naval fleet for these purposes."

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said Medvedev's announcement that Russia would deploy missiles in response to the shield is "disappointing."

Russian officials have warned that deploying the missile shield would open Poland up to an attack in the event of conflict.
advertisement

Russia fears that the missile shield would blunt its nuclear deterrent.

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman reiterated Wednesday that the missiles are not aimed at Russia and are designed as a defensive shield for U.S. allies in Europe. He said the shield is designed with the possibility of Iranian ballistic missiles in mind.

I warned that this could happen. It's Kennedy all over again.

[MKSheppard]

I like this part

His position is as it was throughout the campaign: that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable.

Bureaucratese for "Lets kill it."

[ray245]

Luckily, Obama seems to be more wise in regards to Russia, as compared to many other President in modern times.

[The Grim Squeaker]

Luckily, Obama seems to be more wise in regards to Russia, as compared to many other President in modern times.

Meaning what exactly? That he supports dismantling the ABM shield, or that he won't provoke Russia or won't let Russia act freely in regards to neighbouring states or what?
Be fucking specific.

[ray245]

Luckily, Obama seems to be more wise in regards to Russia, as compared to many other President in modern times.

Meaning what exactly? That he supports dismantling the ABM shield, or that he won't provoke Russia or won't let Russia act freely in regards to neighbouring states or what?
Be fucking specific.

He won't provoke Russia.

[That NOS Guy]

He won't provoke Russia.

An ABM site in Poland isn't provoking Russia, they're being entirely irrational in opposing it.

[Guardsman Bass]

He won't provoke Russia.

An ABM site in Poland isn't provoking Russia, they're being entirely irrational in opposing it.

No shit, but what are you going to do? Ignore them while they put more stuff in Kaliningrad? Sit them down for a chat and tell them they are being irrational? Threaten them into accepting it?

One question for the more knowledgeable - is it necessary to actually have the ABM site specifically in Eastern Europe? If it supposedly can stop Iranian assaults, wouldn't it be better to put it in someplace like Turkey, where we had Cold War era missiles anyways, and it's closer?

More generally, couldn't you keep the ABM system in North America, with added space- and ship-sites? Why the need to stick the sucker right next door to the Russians?

[Guardsman Bass]

I like this part

His position is as it was throughout the campaign: that he supports deploying a missile defense system when the technology is proved to be workable.

Bureaucratese for "Lets kill it."

That might not be the case if he keeps Gates on board as Secretary of Defense.

[That NOS Guy]

No shit, but what are you going to do? Ignore them while they put more stuff in Kaliningrad? Sit them down for a chat and tell them they are being irrational? Threaten them into accepting it?

I think all the talk about putting more SS-26s in Kaliningrad is bluster and simply that. More to the point, they're not going to start World War III over this. This is more about them shoring up Russian ego then anything. Why should US actions be dictated by hot air from the Russians?

Unless, of course, they're willing to part with something over this in return for the US scrapping ABM in Poland.

[Darth Raptor]

Is it true that such a defense would be completely inadequate and if so, what's the point? Banking on a slippery slope that once we've set up x missiles, then why not x more and so on?

[Adrian Laguna]

Is it true that such a defense would be completely inadequate and if so, what's the point? Banking on a slippery slope that once we've set up x missiles, then why not x more and so on?

The most expensive part of any anti-ballistic missile system is command and control, not the missiles themselves. Once you've got ten interceptors set-up, you can easily and cheaply expand it to hundreds.

[anybody_mcc]

I, and 60-70 percent of citizens of Czech Republic, would be more than happy if US ABM was cancelled, though I do not have anything against it being built in some willing nation and not here. Frankly the radar issue here is very similar to many things that happend during Bush administration in US, goverment (which right now would lose elections in a lanslide partially because of the radar) just signed it against the will of the citizens, they even didn't bother having referendum.

[cosmicalstorm]

But is it really necessary?
I have always been under the impression that countries like Iran are as scared by the threat of total annihilation as any other, and that the talk about them doing it "because they are crazy suicidebombers" is bullshit.

[Darth Raptor]

But is it really necessary?
I have always been under the impression that countries like Iran are as scared by the threat of total annihilation as any other, and that the talk about them doing it "because they are crazy suicidebombers" is bullshit.

They're not for Iran, they're for Russia. The Russians are actually correct in that this is intended to counter to their strategic nuclear capability, to which they have decided to respond with, "BAWWWW". IIRC, Russia is putting most of its money into developing new and better ballistic missiles, which are cruising toward obsolescence. You know, instead of developing ABM and bombers of their own, hence the BAWWWW-ing.

[Guardsman Bass]

But is it really necessary?
I have always been under the impression that countries like Iran are as scared by the threat of total annihilation as any other, and that the talk about them doing it "because they are crazy suicidebombers" is bullshit.

They're not for Iran, they're for Russia. The Russians are actually correct in that this is intended to counter to their strategic nuclear capability, to which they have decided to respond with, "BAWWWW". IIRC, Russia is putting most of its money into developing new and better ballistic missiles, which are cruising toward obsolescence. You know, instead of developing ABM and bombers of their own, hence the BAWWWW-ing.

That's what I figured. One thing, though - what's the range on this particular variety of ABM system (or any of them, in general)? I don't doubt that we need one, but does it need to be based in Eastern Europe to be effective, or could you operate it from farther west (or from a ship or ships in the Baltic Sea) and still cover the Eastern Europeans?

If it's just because the Russians are sad for making a bad investment in strategic weaponry, then whatever - maybe we could throw them some kind of economic bone or something.

[hawkwind]

Czech government actually welcomed the idea of putting that radar whooping 50 km from Prag, like if it was new liberation from something. They bloody sung glorifiing song about Bush to the tune of "Good day to you major Gagarin" when Condi was here. They should be probably executed on spot.
Majority of people does not want it, but hey - the treaty is signed because "we know better whats good for you people and we will do it even if you dont like it". Huge PR campaign which was pro-radar is getting paid from the pocket of the very people who opposed the idea.
Needles to say that the treaty is in best tradition of U.S foreign policy and our best tradition to bend over without asking whenever a power wants something.
They get explicitly : no taxes, not even the road tax, exemption from Czech legal system for the servicemen, right of passage for army units in the ammount unspecified anywhere over the country, right of military intervention anywhere in the country with details unspecified and free roam for any U.S inteligence or law enforcement agency in the country on basis of fight against the terorism.
What we get out of deal : nothing

Its our fault really, our idiots had unique opportunity to show some spine, because evrybody knew Bush and his establishment is going to be replaced with somebody more reasonable, but they chose to welcome Bush as a liberator, that at the time when inteligent rats in U.S. has been jumping from the Bushs sinking ship.

I m telling you, if it gets scraped, nobody here will cry over it. Idea that several russian rockets have been just re-targeted at Prag is not particulary heart warming.

J.

[Chris OFarrell]

Frankly I think Obama is just keeping his options open at this point, he isn't even the President yet after all. He also may look at removing the interceptors from the VERY forward European locations, relocating them to the states, and keeping the radar and C4I tech in the UK and other willing nations or something.

[Darth Raptor]

Is he even getting briefed on all the super-duper secret stuff yet, or does that happen after he gets sworn in?

[Uraniun235]

Czech government actually welcomed the idea of putting that radar whooping 50 km from Prag, like if it was new liberation from something. They bloody sung glorifiing song about Bush to the tune of "Good day to you major Gagarin" when Condi was here. They should be probably executed on spot.
Majority of people does not want it, but hey - the treaty is signed because "we know better whats good for you people and we will do it even if you dont like it". Huge PR campaign which was pro-radar is getting paid from the pocket of the very people who opposed the idea.
Needles to say that the treaty is in best tradition of U.S foreign policy and our best tradition to bend over without asking whenever a power wants something.
They get explicitly : no taxes, not even the road tax, exemption from Czech legal system for the servicemen, right of passage for army units in the ammount unspecified anywhere over the country, right of military intervention anywhere in the country with details unspecified and free roam for any U.S inteligence or law enforcement agency in the country on basis of fight against the terorism.
What we get out of deal : nothing

Its our fault really, our idiots had unique opportunity to show some spine, because evrybody knew Bush and his establishment is going to be replaced with somebody more reasonable, but they chose to welcome Bush as a liberator, that at the time when inteligent rats in U.S. has been jumping from the Bushs sinking ship.

I m telling you, if it gets scraped, nobody here will cry over it. Idea that several russian rockets have been just re-targeted at Prag is not particulary heart warming.

J.

On the other hand, the Polish seem to have taken a shine to it:

According to the new poll, 58 percent of those surveyed support the missile defense plan — compared with 30 percent in March 2007, early on in the negotiations. The poll was published in the Rzeczpospolita daily.

[hawkwind]

Im not surprised the Poles are better negotiators, since they have some pride. We do not.
But I would not call what WE signed a "deal" since that would imply actually some sort of trade in the sense that you get something for something.

J.

[Kane Starkiller]

Poland and Czech Republic probably don't have a lot of options sitting as they are between Germany that increasingly economically dominates them and a resurgent Russia. Alliance with the US, a country which actually didn't try to exterminate or dominate them in the past 50 years, isn't such a bad idea.

[irishmick79]

I think missile defense will probably go back to being in a state of limbo, where a lot of money for research gets thrown at the program, but plans for actual deployment are either delayed or shelved entirely. Since the Russians clearly aren't buying the US line that the radars are directed towards rogue states and the US hasn't bothered to come up with an alternative solution, it's probably not a bad thing for the US to have more time to work out a more diplomatically acceptable arrangement.

[K. A. Pital]

Yeah, yeah. Russia should bend over and enjoy the US doing whatever it wants regarding ABM defense, especially installing ABM in other nations on the other side of the world.

I swear, if I said Russia should permanently base bombers in Cuba and Latin America, the US would go every possible mile to stop this from happening, and constantly bitch about it whenever possible.

Why should Russia's attempts to stick needles in the US plan to make a huge ABM shield on sea, space and earth be "irrational"? It is rational, we are screwing your plans to install your defense system, makes it harder for you to install it (a) and gives us more time to develop countermeasures while you struggle with the bickering politicians in Europe and elsewhere (b)

War is the continuation of politics by other means, not vice-versa. Russia is very happy that now the US aren't "commited" to a European ABM shield. It means years and years to go until you finally deploy the thing, and the more time spent arguing, the more time we have to restore strategic parity and maintain our ability to wipe you out into future ages.

[hawkwind]

Poland and Czech Republic probably don't have a lot of options sitting as they are between Germany that increasingly economically dominates them and a resurgent Russia. Alliance with the US, a country which actually didn't try to exterminate or dominate them in the past 50 years, isn't such a bad idea.

Fact that said country is on the far side of the world does not have anything with it?

A position of western world, United States included to Czech republic and other smaller countries in europe has been always driven by whatever convenient was in their domestic politics. They did not have any qualms about throwing us to the wolwes twice within 10 years period just because it was easy solution.
We do not owe them a thing.

Besides aliance does not mean : "Submit any request we have and do what we tell you."
It should be bilateral relationship, which is something I just fail to see.


J.

[Rye]

Given the number of nuclear wars we've had without a missile shield, I'm not that worried. It always seemed to me that all remotely rational sides having nukes will persuade all sides to not start wars with one another.