DIPLOMACY

Antimissile Antipathy

By Mark Hosenball | NEWSWEEK

Published Nov 15, 2008

From the magazine issue dated Nov 24, 2008

See All

Topics (1)
Barack Obama

See All

Email To A Friend

Please fill in the following information and we'll email this link.

He hasn't been the president-elect for long, but Barack Obama is already facing his first foreign-policy contretemps. Within hours of the election, Russian leader Dmitri Medvedev threatened to deploy short-range missiles near Russia's border with Poland to "neutralize" an antimissile system that the Bush administration has long planned to install in Poland and the Czech Republic. A few days later, after Obama returned a congratulatory call from Polish President Lech Kaczynski, the Polish leader issued a statement claiming Obama had offered reassurances that he would proceed with the missile plan. But Obama's team disputed Kaczynski's account, saying in a statement that Obama had made "no commitment."

Indeed, Obama has expressed considerable skepticism in the past about the Polish antimissile scheme. In July 2007, he issued a statement accusing the Bush administration of having "exaggerated missile-defense capabilities." In a statement issued prior to the Democratic convention, Obama said he supported continued testing of the antimissile system—but that he also believed a "final decision on deployment must wait" until testing is completed in "2010 at the earliest."

Defense experts affiliated with the Democrats say that the money for missile defense could be better spent elsewhere. Lawrence Korb of the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank led by Obama transition chief John Podesta, described the current Bush plan as a "system not proven to work against a threat that doesn't exist to protect people who don't want to be protected." John Bolton, former Bush administration arms-control expert, said Obama "doesn't like this program and he's looking for a way to shut it down"—a move that Bolton believes would be a grave mistake. An Obama spokeswoman said that his statements about the Polish antimissile plans are consistent with current U.S. policy. A Pentagon spokesman says that recent testing on a similar system has been largely successful.

Member Comments

Posted By: streetwise @ 11/29/2008 12:48:34 PM

Imagine a US nuke attack on Russia (Russian military are payed to think about it) . If there is NO antimissile system, the rest is easy to say: Russians react, MAD, game over . So, nobody will be so fool to do the first move . Imagine if there IS a US antimissile system AGAINST russian missiles . Then, russian react, but some missiles are shooted down (the system will work, won't it ?), the answer is not so "unbearable", and then the attack can be "feasible" . And THIS is a FIRST STRIKE CAPABILITY . Too bad for Russians . UNLESS...unless the Russians are ready to blow out ALL the antimissile system FIRST, (just one false move, and babe...) wherever they are (Poland, Chzeck republic, you name it...) . They seem to be ready (and no wonder why) . And THATS why 70 & of czecks do NOT want the AM system in theyrcountry . Smart guys...
Posted By: JPHR @ 11/25/2008 3:07:16 PM

Bush had to let the ABM treaty lapse in order to install the MDS. So yes it is an ABM system and as such affects the Nuclear Balance by starting to build a "first strike capability". Yes Russia has to react and does so with restraint by indicating it will only respond when this MDS gets installed.
Posted By: princeofwaldo @ 11/23/2008 4:42:43 PM

The anti-missle shield is little more than a 21st century Magnot Line. There are so many ways to defeat the system that it makes little or no sense to pursue. Simply firing decoys in suffecient quanities would easily be enough to overwhelm the system. Worse still, it would give former Soviet satalite countries a false sense of protection that might lead them to do stupid provocative things like the idiots in Georgia did last summer. Just this one issue was enough to earn Obama my vote in the recent election, though there are thousands of other reasons to support him that parallel this same imbicellic stand on the part of the Neoconservatives.