Georgia Crisis Propels a Bad Polish Deal

President Bush's new deal with Poland gives that country millions in aid, stokes Russia's paranoia and decreases America's security. It is bad policy.

President Bush has promised Poland tens of millions of dollars in defense assistance to buy its agreement to deploy 10 anti-missile interceptors he says are necessary to counter a future Iranian missile threat. Here is the punch line: the interceptors don't work and Iran doesn't have any missiles that can reach Europe, let alone the United States. Wait, there's more.

After insisting for two years that the anti-missile base had nothing to do with Russia and was all about Iran, missile defense proponents now say it is all about countering Russia. They cite the conflict in Georgia as justification for their rush to deploy a technology that does not work against a threat that does not exist.

The Bush administration had gone to great lengths to assure Russia that the proposed anti-missile bases in the Czech Republic and Poland are not intended to offset a threat from the Kremlin. Director of the Missile Defense Agency, General Trey Obering, said just one month ago.

"Russia's primary concern was that we were exaggerating the Iranian threat and therefore these sites in Europe must be directed at them. That was their primary concern. And we've gone a long way to try to dissuade them of that notion."

Well, forget all that. Citing the looming specter of a reborn Russian Empire, Senator John McCain's foreign policy advisor Randy Scheunemann told Congressional Quarterly's Josh Rogin this week the bases were necessary to push back against Russia:

"Russia's objections (to the sites) have never been based on anything more than trying to define a sphere of influence in Europe and on the territory of existing NATO members...Senator McCain believes that is unacceptable -- especially in the aftermath of Russia's brutal invasion of Georgia."

McCain supporter Representative Trent Franks (R.-AZ) went further telling CQ:

"This is not just about missile defense; this is about demonstrating to Russia that America is still a nation of resolve . . . and we're not going to let Russian expansionism intimidate everyone."

Apparently tired of bluffing, missile defense advocates feel comfortable with showing their hand now that Russia has exhibited its expansionist tendencies. Their new argument shows both the insincerity of their former position and the simplicity of their view on how to defend America.

They mismanaged the relationship with Russia, passed up Putin's offer to cooperate in missile defenses against Iran, wasted $60 billion over the past seven years on anti-missile weapons that have never passed a realistic test, wasted trillions of dollars and thousands of lives on an unnecessary war in Iraq, yet now they insist that we trust them this time.

The proposed deployment of missile defenses in Poland and the Czech Republic and the Russian-Georgia conflict are two separate issues. This is not about defending the democracy in Georgia; this is about ideologues trying to save a weapons system they have supported despite mounting evidence of its irrelevance to the threats America faces.

Will this Polish deal somehow convince Russia to back down? Hardly. Leading Russian experts and officials told me in Moscow earlier this year that they were convinced the missile bases were part of US plan to encircle Russia. Linking the bases to US opposition to Russia's invasion of Georgia will cement that view. Russian President Medvedev has already warned of their response:

"Deployment of elements of the U.S. global antimissile system in Eastern Europe only makes the situation worse...We will need to react to this adequately. Our American and European partners have been warned."

With the exception of those who have been drinking the missile defense Kool-aid, experts agree that long-range missile interception does not work. That is why Congress wisely ordered that no funds be spent on these European bases until after realistic tests can show the weapons can work and the Czech and the Polish parliaments approve any deal. Neither is likely before 2010.

We should never back down in the face of Russian aggression against its neighbors. The sovereign rights of Georgia must be respected and defended, but moving forward with the European missile bases will not do anything to help the Georgians, the Poles...or us.

Follow Joe Cirincione on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Cirincione

Comments

[research]

Read Wesley Clark's view that NATO should be disbanded.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/08/22/russian-forces-begin-pull_n_120594.html?show_comment_id=14882517#comment_14882517

[broadbrush]

This is another unnecessary problem for the United States as if we did not have enough on our plate.
NATO was intended to be the NORTH ATLANTIC TREATY ORGANIZATION not a worldwide security pact
and surrounding a traditionally paranoid Russia has less to do with extending liberty than circumventing
Russian oil and gas domination for western Europe.Ins­tead of utilizing the fear of missile defense and NATO expansion to resolve nuclear disarmament, the Iran problem, and the demilitariziation of Eastern Europe , we are expanding the market for the military-industrial complex and making the world less safe.We are creating a powderkeg in a most dangerous portion of the world, The Germanys were united
peacefully with some assurances that East European expansion would not occur, but instead by steady encroachment we have backed the rat into a corner, Would we tolerate missiles in Haiti and Cuba? They may be next.

[LightningJoe]

Now, years after America's refusal to assist the birth of the New Russia, That nation is run by the worst of the old power block -- who if anything, are more paranoid than ever about giving in to progressive instincts.

We COULD have had a powerful partner-nation, and both poles COULD have been dedicated to a fair division of resources and autonomy between nations, with policy mechanisms in place to address the needs and aspirations of smaller nations.

Instead, we have an escalation, on the international scale, of the problematic human drive to compete against all comers. We think we have a stake in making our "opponents" weaker, as we grow stronger. We should have learned by now, that putting down the legitimate aspirations of others does not make those aspirations go away, but throws fertilizer on them. They grow until they present problems that exceed the relatively piddling efforts at accomodation, that helping those aspirations would have taken.

It's a law of human nature. Denied desires grow. Unless, with respect for their potential power, they are offered new, healthy channels of expression. Simple suppression of desires is of no use at all, and in fact is highly counter-productive, because suppression itself causes resentment, whether in a context of personal psychology, or that of national aspirations. And that sort of resentment, in case you haven't noticed, is the driver of more and more international policy these days.

There is a better road, but we resentful humans can't take it.

[coach777b]

Randy Scheunemann is THE lobbyist for Georgia so anything he says on this subject is false. Technically, there is no way that a missile defense system can be constructed and operational before the inaugaration in Jan. The next President (Obama?), should make it his first order of business to derail this folly. The Star Wars advocates see a pot of gold in the design and manufacturing of this mythical system. It's all about the money. They KNOW that Iran does not have a missile capable of reaching Europe but that so-called threat was a smokescreen from the beginning.

[Michale32086]

@ leonardse

}}}}}}}}}}}}}
It appears you have followed this drama very closely, however, I disagree with your assertion that the Russians are the only ones asserting a claim over South Ossetia. The South Osettians evidently have asserted their loyalty to Russia. Do they not count?
}}}}}}}}}}}}}}

As "mean" as it sounds, no.. Their claim does not count.

Their claim does not count anymore than the Confederate's claims counted when they attacked Fort Sumter to begin the US Civil War..

}}}}}}}}}
It is obvious Georgia made a HUGE mistake with many mistaken assumptions
}}}}}}}}}

No one is disputing that.

But that doesn't mean Russia is in the right with their illegal invasion and the subsequent burning and looting and crimes committed by Russian and South Ossetian "soldiers"­...

Michale...­..

[leonardse]

Michale-

Obviously this issue is not a recent issue, but goes back to 1991 when the first elected president of Georgia "cancelled" the agreement negotiated between Ossetia and Russia. At that time, Ossetia was considered an independent entity, so I guess the question is how could Georgia cancel a valid agreement between Ossetia and Russia and to which they were not a party other than in their own minds? There is plenty of blame to go around in this current fiasco of which Georgia is no less culpable. We in the West continue to have the inability to understand historical grudges of which the passions are so strong that reason flies out the door.

In the least, Georgia made the biggest miscalculation because they obviously had the most to lose and did not have the ability to protect their losses. The response from Russia certainly should not have surprised Georgians, even if the Western countries were caught flat-footed.

[MagisterLudi]

I would NEVER vote for MCain and I am for sure not voting Obama.
And this one-sided attack on McCain ( justified) and his advisers should CERTAINLY include the strident Russia-hater Brzezinski, who writes Obama's speeches on Russia.

[Michale32086]

But years of negotiations with separatist leaders in Abkhazia and South Ossetia have proved fruitless. Saakashvili has offered those governments broad autonomy in exchange for allegiance to Georgia, but Abkhaz and South Ossetian leaders have insisted on full-scale independence or absorption into Russia.

Georgia's all-out assault on South Ossetia was preceded by attacks by Ossetian forces against Georgian troops earlier in the week, including a separatist ambush with rocket-propelled grenades on a Georgian armored personnel carrier that killed two soldiers and injured six, Georgian authorities said. On Thursday, a separatist mortar attack on the village of Avnevi killed eight Georgian civilians.

Thursday evening, Saakishvili called for a cease-fire and urged separatist leaders to resume talks on a peaceful settlement. But when separatists began shelling Georgian villages after Saakashvili's cease-fire call, Georgian leaders decided to move ahead with the assault.

"Separatists opened fire in response to yesterday's peaceful initiative of the president of Georgia," said Georgian Prime Minister Lado Gurgenidze in a televised address. "As a result, lives of civilians were under threat."

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-080808-georgia-ossetia-webaug09,0,4176197.story

[leonardse]

Well, Michale-

It appears you have followed this drama very closely, however, I disagree with your assertion that the Russians are the only ones asserting a claim over South Ossetia. The South Osettians evidently have asserted their loyalty to Russia. Do they not count?

It is obvious Georgia made a HUGE mistake with many mistaken assumptions regarding help from the West. This has the fingerprints of the Bushies all over it and yes, once again, they screwed it up. I don't understand why the Georgians would not have realized the Bushies are inept and not depend upon them with their lives. "Stupid is as stupid does".

Georgia offered autonomy for allegiance? Well, you have to "want " to have allegiance. Evidently, those people in South Ossetia do not want to be part of Georgia. Why can't they choose? That is about "democracy"spouted all over the world by Bush. I guess if it doesn't go his way, then it is not Democracy.

[Michale32086]

@research

}}}}}}}}}}}
Ossitia is disputed.
}}}}}}}}}}

Internationally, South Ossetia is not disputed. It is clearly part of Georgia.. The ONLY country who disputes this is Russia...

}}}}}}}}}}}}}
Georgia signed a peace treaty agreeing not to invade Ossitia. Ossetia asked for an got Russian peace keepers, some of whom were killed in the Georgian attack.
}}}}}}}}}}}}}

Wrong.. The only "treaty" that pertains to South Ossetia is The Treaty Of Moscow, which Russia bullied it's former satellite states into signing. A "treaty" that Georgia left when it became clear that South Ossetia, at the urging of it's Russian puppetmasters were planning a violent rebellion.

There is ample evidence to show that Georgia's action of putting troops into South Ossetia was a response to shelling and attacks by South Ossetia irregulars backed up by Russian "Peacekeepers". There is NO WAY that Russia could have fielded that brutal and overwhelming invasion force that invaded Georgia. There is simply no way that this could not have been an unplanned and spontaneous invasion..

Michale...­..

[MagisterLudi]

More Pearls of lawyer- talk from Misha:
[AP]Saakashvili lashed out at a suggestion that Georgia started the conflict by entering South Ossetia last week. "I'm sickened, sickened of this cynical and absolutely unfounded allegation­."

[YesWeCanada]

Here is a good take on Bush's War in Georgia.

http://www.populistamerica.com/bushs_war_in_georgia

[research]

Michale asked if we should "throw Georgia to the wolves"

McCain "threw Georgia to the wolves." That's a very good way to state it. I'm against it. We should have explained the facts of life to Georgia and told it to forget about Ossitia.

Instead McCain's foreign adviser took lobbying money from the Georgian governments and convinced them Ossitia was theirs and they should take it back. Israel provide weapons to Georgia and the USA provided military training just a week before.

You conservatives

Threw Georgia to the wolves.

[DS1Roger]

Nice to see the old it has to work 100% before we use it crowd. Russia has come to the conclusion if emplaced they would consider it a threat. If some thing doesn't work you want your enemies to waste money time and effort on it. The possibility it might work seems to scare them. Nothing a few nukes couldn't cure. Even if we had 100 missiles there and every one of them caught one. The 101st missile gets though. Ah but wait that's 100 packages that don't get delivered. Is that a bad thing?
How can a defensive method be aggressive?

It's the Georgians country they do what they do. If you think we are in charge of their actions you are out of line.

[research]

The missile system is so bad, it has never shot down an missile without a radio beacon, and HAS shot down friendly aircraft.

No 100% bs. is 100% bad.

Search:
missile defense system usa faulty 2008 "friendly fire
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4176/is_20030422/ai_n14548094

[Adamwestiii]

Joe, I know you are very knowledgeable about foreign affairs and I can't disagree with any of your comments regarding this issue.

[gevan]

Must be that famous "military intelligence" that would site these interceptors on the Baltic. After all, it's not as if we'd have to defend Greece or Bulgaria or Italy or Spain, right? Perhaps those Iranian missles will be hidden in the Urals.

[NetProphet]

"They mismanaged the relationship with Russia, passed up Putin's offer to cooperate in missile defenses against Iran, wasted $60 billion over the past seven years on anti-missile weapons that have never passed a realistic test, wasted trillions of dollars and thousands of lives on an unnecessary war in Iraq, yet now they insist that we trust them this time."


. . . .THIS JUST DESERVES TO BE RE-SAID AGAIN. THANKS JOE CIRINCIONE ! ! !

[NetProphet]

Apparently after getting snubbed by the BUSH PUSH administration regarding NATO, the Russians have been ticked-off for quite some time. Why just look at the millions $ we've been sending to Georgia ...... and now Poland....­.and who knows how many other nations SURROUNDING Russia. The Ukraine is probably - at this time - facing the same monotary $ "flattery" that the rest of Eastern Europe is receiving ON OUR BACKS! - - - - all for "DEFENCE & SECURITY"

. . . . .and MCCAIN complains under Obama the US will have an enormous budget deficit !.......We­ll, at least, let's hope, he'll be President of the people in the U.S.A. AND NOT the President of people in other countries, while cutting the unnecessary military $"OFFENSE"$ rather than manipulate and provoke our allies.

SAY!......­can someone tell me just WHEN did Georgia get added to the European Union and is even now being considered becoming part of NATO?! ......... even before the Russian Federation?! No wonder Gorbaciov is angry at the Bushies all this time for ignoring his & his country's pleas. Adding to this, Mr. Bush would even like to kick Russia out of the G8!

These GOPpers have no tactics! No wonder we're broke at home and our friends hate us.

[Malloy]

Naturally, I was upset when I heard of all the unfair tactics Russia/Putin was employing when they first
started this whole peice of work, However, who the hell said that war is fair. Putin will never be good for
his word. Upon Russia saying that they were going to back off on their "attacks", I had to laugh as who would take that seriously, they just began for God's sake. This is my gut feeling about all this. Putin, is a souless human being. When he dies he will be a wretched demon floating in the ether. I believe they thought carefully about the timing. The United States is getting pressure to back out of Iraq. We are in the middle of elections. Our economy is on a downward slope and they may beleive that Obama, if elected, would not be an aggresive Commander and Chief. I just don't think that his timing was coincidence.