The Czech government used a visit by Secretary of State Condi Rice to sign on to the United States' proposed missile defense system. The Czech Republic will be home to an advanced radar system designed to detect missiles launched by 'rogue states' that will then (according to the plan) be shot down by anti-ballistic missiles based in Poland. That is if the Poles ever agree to host their part of the plan.
So far, after almost agreeing on several occasions, the Poles have refused to host the missiles. Now, according to The Guardian newspaper, the Poles say they will not allow US missiles to be put on their soil unless the US also gives them Patriot missiles. The Polish government fears that the missile base will be targeted by Russia and they want some ways to defend themselves. And on the negotiations go...
Honestly, it would be nice at this point if we just abandoned this whole stupid idea.
First, there's no proof that the missile defense system even works. There have been a series of tests, but in many the interceptor missiles have had the flight plan of the target missile programmed into them (as if a rogue state would be kind enough to give us advanced warning that they were going to launch a sneak attack), and even with that advantage the system has still failed almost half the tests.
Second, bases for the missile shield program have already been built in California and Alaska - sites carefully chosen to ensure that the entire territory of the United States would be under the security umbrella of the missile defense program. Why then do we need these bases in Eastern Europe you may ask?
Third, the whole idea of 'rogue states' launching missiles at the United States is a little absurd. The nightmare scenario used to justify the missile defense system is Iran developing a nuclear missile and shooting it at the United States. Right now though, Iran does not have nuclear weapons, and their best missiles fly only about 1,000 miles (about 6,000 miles short of hitting America). And even if they do develop a missile and do develop a weapon to put on it, the question that's never asked is why in the world would they? The United States and Soviet Union spent several decades pointing nuclear weapons at each other, but never went to war because of the concept called "Mutually Assured Destruction" (a.k.a. MAD) - that both sides would be destroyed in the resulting war. Now apply that idea to Iran and their (hypothetical) one nuclear missile versus the several thousand nukes in the US arsenal. It's unilateral, not mutual, destruction and the Iranians know it.
In other words - it’s a system that may not work, to defend against a threat that does not exist, based in locations it does not need to be in the first place.
I have heard some foreign policy analysts argue that the missile defense system is a way for the United States to strengthen its ties with some of the newly democratic states in Eastern Europe. Not a bad intention I suppose, but there must be other ways to meet the same goal. Besides the agreement with the Czechs only came after a lot of negotiations, and the Poles still aren't on board, and the public in both nations are largely against the idea. It hardly seems like something that is strengthening our relationships. Just to put icing on the cake, the Russian government is dead set against the missile plan, something hurting our relationship with the Russian Federation and in turn making Europe less, rather than more secure.
Unfortunately even if Poland were to back out of the plan there is some talk about basing the missiles in Lithuania instead. Sometimes the dumbest ideas are the hardest to give up.
2 days ago
No comments:
Post a Comment