- MUST READS
- PRODUCTS
- RESOURCES
- MULTIMEDIA
- ENFACTLOPEDIA
- FSM AUTHORS
- ABOUT US
- CONTACT US
- FSM BLOG
- DONATE
- PRESS COVERAGE
SEARCH FSM
- IN THIS SECTION
September 22, 2009
Exclusive: Why Is Appeasing the Russians More Important than American and Allied Security?
James Carafano, PhD, Presidential Policy: Does It Make the Grade?
Last week was perhaps the worst for this White House so far. The administration earned its first “F,” when the president cancelled plans to emplace a missile defense shield in Western Europe that would protect our allies, U.S. bases overseas, as well as the American homeland from a long-range missile threat from Iran.
The Iranian missile threat is growing. It is stunning to hear government officials claim that they cancel defenses because they are “less” concerned about an Iranian threat. Even assertions from the administration that intelligence suggests the threat is not there yet proved pretty empty, when the White House later admitted they had “no new intelligence,” they were just interpreting the available intelligence “differently.”
Administration claims that they would replace the cancelled missile shield with a “better” system also rang hollow. When running for president, Obama declared that he wanted “proven and cost effective” missile defenses. The missile defense shield planned for Western Europe would have satisfied both these criteria. Currently, the Pentagon has no practical alternative available. It will take years to develop a system capable of defending all of Europe and the U.S. from an Iranian threat. At this point the cost of that system is completely unknown. It is also not clear where that money would come from. The administration just cut 15 percent from the missile defense budget.
While the White House has tried to paint the decision to kill the missile defense shield in Europe as a positive step forward, it is anything but that. In a recent paper, Heritage missile defense expert Baker Spring took apart the administration’s decision point by point.
The truth is that cutting the missile shield is all about appeasing the Russians. The White House threw allies that had agreed to host the missile defense sites (Poland and the Czech Republic) under the bus just to make Moscow happy. And in that at least, they succeeded. Putin is a happy man. But don’t expect anything in return – like, helping to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons. As Russia’s NATO ambassador said: “The Americans have simply corrected their own mistakes. And we are not duty-bound to pay someone for putting their own mistakes right.” The Russians may be happy, but the Poles are livid. (Spokeswoman for Polish MOD called “catastrophic for Poland.”) We gave Russia a veto over a NATO decision and turned Poland and the Czech Republic into second class citizens in NATO – as NATO members now under the influence of Moscow.
Gutting missile defense wasn’t the administration’s only miscue last week. After the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the senior commander in Afghanistan both signaled more troops were need to with the war over there, Vice President Biden said the administration is no hurry to send more troops. I am sure the Taliban and al Qaeda appreciated the heads up.
Biden’s declaration may spell real trouble. As Heritage analyst Jim Philips argues, the Pentagon needs to make a full court press to win in Afghanistan. Ignoring the advice of the generals suggests the mission in Afghanistan could be in real trouble.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor James Jay Carafano, Ph.D., is a leading expert in defense affaires, intelligence, military operations and strategy, and homeland security at the Heritage Foundation. Feedback: editorialdirector@familysecuritymatters.org.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (0)
| Print This E-mail This |
|
