After expressing strong opposition to the scheme no more than a month ago, Moscow has changed tack somewhat, offering its own variant on a "missile shield" to European governments, and engaging in talks with the Bush administration on the question. At the same time, President Vladimir Putin has expressed sharp opposition to the Washington-driven expansion of NATO eastward toward Russia.

The Bush administration is pushing ahead on two fronts. One is to expand the NMD program initiated under the Clinton administration, which justified the antimissile system as a necessary measure against strikes by "rogue nations," such as Iraq and north Korea. This theme is also being used by the new administration.

The U.S. rulers hope they can develop the technology, designed to knock incoming nuclear missiles out of the sky, to give them a first-strike capacity over other countries, especially the workers states of China and Russia.

Bush laid out the other front with his proposal for "deep, perhaps unilateral cuts in long-range nuclear arms," according to the New York Times, from the current arsenal of 7,000 nuclear warheads to 2,000.

With the exception of Paris, Washington's European allies have begun to bow to Washington's plans, in spite of continuing reservations. "While there is little love in Europe for the idea [of NMD]," editorialized the Wall Street Journal on February 22, "most of America's partners--France notwithstanding--seemed to have resigned themselves to missile defense. Germany, an early skeptic, has made it clear it won't try to stand in the way of Washington's plans."

At a Franco-German summit in June of last year, German chancellor Gerhard Schröder warned that Washington risked triggering an accelerated arms race with its missile shield program. French president Jacques Chirac said he was of the "same opinion." Since then differences between Berlin and Paris have emerged on this and other questions.

British prime minister Anthony Blair traveled to Washington in later February for his first meeting with Bush. Blair stopped short of a clear public endorsement of the missile program, but the Financial Times reported February 24 that Blair "expressed optimism...that the U.S. and Russia could reach an accommodation before Washington proceeds with controversial plans for a missile defence system." Radar sites in the United Kingdom are expected to form a part of any system that is eventually deployed.  
 
European force and NATO
After the talks, Bush claimed that Blair told him the projected European rapid reaction force would be subordinate to the Washington-dominated NATO alliance. "He assured me that NATO is going to be the primary way to keep the peace in Europe," said the U.S. president on February 23.

The planned European force, initiated by Paris and London, will comprise 60,000 troops. Blair, declaring himself "gratified" by Bush's words, said that the force will be used only in "circumstances where NATO as a whole chooses not to be engaged."

Several days later Blair's defense secretary, Geoffrey Hoon, stated that "there were 'low-level' operations where [the force] could act autonomously," according to a Financial Times report. Iain Duncan Smith, the defense spokesperson for the opposition Conservative Party, seized on the statement, saying, "Tony Blair has given assurances to President Bush which are simply untrue."

Until recently, the Russian government has rejected Washington's missile program and the political justifications that cloak its real purpose, pointing out that it violates the terms of the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, signed by Washington and Moscow in 1972. In a widely trumpeted change, Russian foreign minister Igor Ivanov said at a February 20 Kremlin news conference that "we are ready and interested in starting a direct dialogue with the U.S. administration."

Representatives of the Russian government, who met with NATO secretary general Lord Robertson in late February, outlined a missile shield under consideration by the Russian military, and offered its protection to the European powers. The Wall Street Journal's editorial writers opined that the Kremlin's policy shift seems based on "the assumption...that the Bush Administration is committed to an effective missile defense program and that it is fully prepared to withdraw from the ABM Treaty," and "the false hope...[that] Russia can aggravate cracks within the Atlantic Alliance over missile defense."  
 
Putin and ABM treaty
White House spokesperson Ari Fleischer commented February 22 that "the president was pleased to see the Russians indicate a level of support for a national missile defense concept."

In spite of this shift, Russian president Putin has not dropped his defense of the ABM treaty, and won support for that position in a recent visit to south Korea. In a joint statement released February 27, Putin and south Korean president Kim Dae Jung "agreed that the 1972 [ABM] Treaty is the cornerstone of strategic stability and an important foundation of international efforts on nuclear disarmament and nonproliferation."

The government in south Korea is particularly concerned about the Bush administration's belligerent stance towards the government in the north, including its advocacy of the missile program. The New York Times speculated that "it is also possible Mr. Kim's criticism reflected a general concern in Asia that the American missile defense plans will isolate China by rendering ineffective its tiny nuclear arsenal."  
 
NATO's 'threat to Russia'
Talks between Robertson and Putin in Moscow also included U.S.-sponsored plans to further expand NATO to include the former Soviet republics of Lithuania, Estonia, and Latvia, which border Russia.

Moscow had also objected to a previous eastward expansion of NATO in the 1990s, when Hungary, the Czech Republic, and Poland were accepted into membership. The governments of Denmark and Poland have joined Washington in sponsoring the application of the three Baltic states.

The membership of the three countries, wrote the Wall Street Journal on February 22, "would allow NATO jets to reach vital sites in western Russia within minutes." Putin told Robertson that the "expansion of the defensive union to the borders of Russia cannot be explained by anything else than a threat to Russia."

One week earlier, Russia's military had launched a demonstrative series of strategic long-range bomber and ballistic missile tests. The exercises showed that "Russian strategic forces are capable of overcoming any anti-missile defense, be it a currently existing or potential one," said Col. Gen. Valery Manilov at a ceremony in the Kremlin. The government of Japan protested that the Russia military exercises violated its airspace.

Just before the tests, Moscow's defense ministry's foreign relations chief denounced the "anti-Russian overtones" of "the rhetoric of the new administration's officials." He was referring to remarks by U.S. defense secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who had accused Moscow of contributing to the spread of nuclear missile technology.
 
 
Related article:
Seoul voices concern over shift in U.S. policies  
 
 
Front page (for this issue) | Home | Text-version home