Missile Offence
Russia was gravely offended by the very notion of its former opponent as a super-power-duo where one balanced off against the other with their spheres of influence and now the world's only super power, treating it with the kind of disrespect that Russia is accustomed to itself foisting on its former satellites. All the more so, when the United States has become a confidant and 'protector' of its former satellites. All of whom, as former satrapies of the USSR have no fond memories of their status then, despite the jingoism of "equal but different".They were not equal, in fact, but were forced, through the might of the Soviet Union, to surrender their national autonomy, their geographic borders, their fundamental social differences, their national treasures, their independence of thought, their heritage, their natural resources, for the greater good of Russia and its commitment to totalitarian, collective communist rule. Little wonder, then, that they harbour a burning resentment against Russia, dredging up memories of brutality and starvation.
And the deaths of millions of people. And the loss of hope for the future. Now that they have entered the future they would like to preserve their political distance from Russia; geopolitically difficult, but they're making the effort to disassociate themselves, harbouring a wish to leave the past behind and with it any pretensions to love for Russia. Staking their future instead in another common pot; the European Union and NATO.
With a strong American defence behind them in theory, they could thumb their collective noses at still-imperial Russia with its ongoing designs for continued hegemony. And the former assurances of missile defence and radar installations in Poland and the Czech Republic, all of the satellites of yore felt confident they were successfully isolating themselves from the Russian Bear. Perhaps too confident given last year's Russian invasion of Georgia with the pretense of insufferable provocation.
Trouble is, the U.S. was too careless, too arrogant, too insensitive to its former antagonist in its insistence on the need for a missile defence system on Russia's doorstep; in effect rubbing its nose in its desertion by its former partners, all flocking to what the United States represents, eager to disavow anything that emanates from Russia. So in that respect it's just as well, and all things considered it is a good thing that the United States of President Barack Obama decided to withdraw.
It was a rational decision. A prudent and useful decision to stop waving a red flag of defiance in Russia's already-apoplectic face. Now arms reductions talks in the wake of the expiring Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty can proceed with mutual determination. It would be a very good thing also, if Russia's announcement that it will no longer plan to counter U.S. missile defence with the same of its own bordering the EU takes place. But that should not be seen as the operative quid pro quo.
Instead, Washington should anticipate that Moscow now will be more reasonable in other, vital matters. Not only that it should begin to support U.S. and UN moves to strenuously deny Iran's plans for nuclearization, undoubtedly leading to nuclear armaments, but Russia must admit its dangerous role in helping Iran in its ambitions, and cease. Russian enablement of Iran's nuclear reactors, its expert assistance and cost-underwriting, its sale of advanced missiles to the Islamic Republic of Iran should advance toward cessation.
The missile defence system that was to have been installed in Eastern Europe was representative of the power of appearance more than anything truly substantial as a missile deterrent. It would be a step backward if the new decision to withdraw missile defence and radar from the area, and install it elsewhere where it is seen to be more feasibly useful, is ultimately defined by Russia and by Iran as the appeasement of weakness.
Labels: Russia, Technology, Troublespots, United States
posted by Pieface @ Sunday, September 20, 2009
<< Home