Since February 2009 , this blog and Huib's 3 other Euroblogs are together at:

- In Europa Zu Hause [DE]
- L'Europe Chez Soi [FR]
- At Home in Europe [EN]
- In Europa Thuis [NL]

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Europe: Missile defense plan coolly received

The Financial Times relates how European representatives reacted to the US missile defense project in a NATO meeting, one of these days:

Europe cool on US missile bases plan

By Daniel Dombey in Brussels and Neil Buckley in Moscow

The US sought on Thursday to overcome scepticism among its Nato allies and hostility from Russia over its plans to locate missile defence bases in Europe – but failed to win a convincing show of support.


Thursday’s US presentation, spearheaded by Lt. Trey Obering, director of the missile defence agency, Eric Edelman, under-secretary of defence, and John Rood, head of the State Department’s non-proliferation bureau, argued that the proposed sites in Poland and the Czech Republic would allow the system to cover all but a handful of Nato allies.

The system, which is principally designed to protect the continental US, already uses bases in
California and Alaska. According to maps circulating among Nato officials, only Turkey and parts of Greece, Bulgaria and Romania would be outside the system’s protection once additional interceptor missiles were installed in Poland and radar in the Czech Republic.


But on Thursday some countries, including Turkey and Belgium, voiced worries that shooting down missiles could leave them at risk of radioactive debris, and also mentioned concerns about command and control of the new system, public opinion and the reaction of Russia.

Exactly the three points, I mentioned earlier here. But I do not think, that Europe should follow blindly Russia in its opposition. A continental protective system against space-born nuclear attacks is not wrong in itself. On the contrary: It would strengthen Europe's position in world politics and be a supplementary stimulus for European cooperation on security matters. It is a problem that only can be solved by the EU-countries themselves. Hiding behind the broadening Russian back, is a second-choice, weak, option.

Moreover, the Russians seem not to be so sure themselves, what they want exactly:

At a later stage of the meeting, Russia took approximately an hour to outline its objections – despite promises from the US to deepen co-operation through steps such as sharing radar images to help early warning.

In Moscow, Sergei Ivanov, Russia’s first deputy prime minister, said he saw ”no grounds” for co-operation between Russia and the US on creating a joint missile defence system.

”We believe this system of strategic missile defence has, to put it mildly, a somewhat chimerical nature,” he said.

Mr Ivanov’s comments represented an apparent change in Russia’s position.
The first deputy premier had told the Financial Times in an interview earlier this week that Russia had proposed creating a joint anti-missile defence system to Nato five years ago, saying it could use Russian-made S-300 or S-400 surface-to-air missiles. ”We could ward off the threat this way,” he said.

But he also told the FT he believed there was no realistic possibility of Iran or North Korea having missiles that could reach Europe or the US in the foreseeable future.

Powered by ScribeFire.

No comments:

Related Posts with Thumbnails