Saturday, November 28, 2009

Obama , Missile Defense, and Iran. Lets Just Chill Out and Let the Pres.and the Secretary of State Do Their Jobs! It is Going Pretty Well So Far -Don't Ya Think?

All week we have listened to the cackling voices on the right insistently grousing about the Obama administration decision to modify the missile defense system proposed by the Bush administration.  The decision, endorsed by Robert Gates, would replace missiles in Poland and a radar station in the Czech Republic with a ground and sea based system which the administration says will be more effective and is far more palatable to the Russians.  (Understandably so; remember the Cuban missile crisis?)

Conservative outrage seems divided into two schools of thought:

  1.  Obama hates America and fiendishly intends to undermine our ability to defend ourselves and our allies.   These folks like to talk about Jeremiah Wright and almost always use the President’s middle name.  Their fans are currently arming themselves to the teeth, making racist signs, and believe everything they read on the internet.
  2.  Obama is a fool who has unilaterally given up a strategic advantage to the Russians with nothing in return.  They see this plan as betraying our allies and leaving us exposed to missile attacks from Iran. Their followers believe the Robert Gates, in endorsing this short sighted strategy, is a w----.

Obama denied that the new strategy was as concession to the Russians on Sunday, noting, however that if it made them a little “less paranoid” about the US, it would be an “added bonus”.

For years, the Bush administration was convinced that the strategy to halt Iran’s nuclear weapons program was through economic sanctions ( http://merln.ndu.edu/archivepdf/wmd/State/33907.pdf ) However, they proved inept at getting cooperation from the Russians whose veto on the UN Security Council was particularly troublesome.

In fact, during the Bush administration, economic and strategic ties between Iran and Russia became much stronger. Putin was the first Russian leader since Stalin to set foot in Iran in 2007, reaching agreements in commerce, mostly energy projects, amounting to over 100 billion ( http://www.thehindu.com/2008/01/07/stories/2008010762321000.htm ). The Putin administration sold advanced Tor-M1 antiaircraft missiles to Iran, and has “concluded – but still not delivered on – a contract to provide long-range S-300 air defense systems” to the Iranians ( http://www.csmonitor.com/2009/0323/p06s01-woeu.html .). 

 

Despite attempts by the current President to engage, the Russians have not indicated a willingness to help: "Just like the Americans overestimated the threat from Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, they've also been overestimating, all this time, the threat from Iran," Konstantin Kosachev, chairman of the International Affairs Committee in Russia’s Duma said, earlier this month.  ) http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125323619130621755.html )

 

 

Now Obama is signaling that the time for talk with Iran is coming to an end, confronting them along with the Prime Ministers of France, Great Britain, and Germany.  Russia, in signaling a new willingness to cooperate with the civilized world in sanctioning Iran, is effectively knocking a prop out from under them that has previously helped sustain them in the face of pressure from civilized nations.  By admitting the Iran has violated decisions of the UN Security Council they have put themselves in a position of having to limit their condemnation if Israel should they decide to take pre-emptive action.  How far will Russia go in supporting sanctions and limiting economic support?  Time will tell.  But it is certainly a new world.

Can we take Obama and Gates at their word that the change in missile defense is due to a “better idea” or was this a concession, made to the Russians, to bring them into the community of responsible nations regarding the issue of nuclear proliferation?   Were the improving relations between Russia and Poland factors in Obama’s decision? 

The President and Secretary of State Clinton are in a position of having to earn trust on the “fast track”.  While the Russian’s can’t be seen as being “beguiled” by Obama’s charms or rhetoric, thinking people in Russia have to be uncomfortable with their policy of acquiescence to Iran’s nuclear program and the  instability a nuclear Iran would bring to the region.   Obama’s decision has given them a basis to do the right thing.

The Russians could be crucial here.  Further diplomatic and economic isolation of Iran may also be the exact inspiration that insurgents within the country need to force a regime change, should the government refuse to cooperate with the UN.  This strategy may prove to be far more effective in influencing internal Iranian politics than anything Obama might have said in support of the insurgency last summer..

Have we given up the store in order to accomplish these concessions from the Russians?  Robert Gates says “no” this is a better idea.  He gets better advice than I on that subject. 

Careful purposeful diplomacy is a sharp contrast to the guns and bluster of the previous eight years.  We can sleep a little better knowing that that Barack and Hillary are thinking a few moves ahead of the headlines.  Let’s just settle down and watch these guys work.

To those not offended by language, let me refer you to the link below:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3004/2887021675_93921f87ea.jpg

As of this writing, even China has also joined the voices calling for Iran to provide access to the hidden nuclear enrichment facility.  But they have fallen short of supporting sanctions.



Syndication:

From the Community…

Comments 1-4 of 4
  • Mhu's Avatar
    Posted by Mhu Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:17pm PDT

    Obama is being gamed. He threw Eastern Europe under the bus. "So far" he is an embarrassment. The impact of events like the follies at the UN and Pittsburgh evolve over years and decades, not just a few days and months. He probably can't play poker, either.

    Report Abuse
  • __A_YAHOO_USER__'s Avatar
    Posted by __A_YAHOO_USER__ Sat Sep 26, 2009 6:19pm PDT

    hahaha, Jerry, are you still cackling?

    Catch you later.

    Report Abuse
  • Jerry's Avatar
    Posted by Jerry Sun Sep 27, 2009 7:20am PDT

    Mhu, I think those who supported the Bush administration policies of name calling and refusal to engage, the invasion of Iraq without a UN Security Counsel Resolution or real proof of WMD with inspectors on ght ground do feel embarrassed with good reason that it is necessary for the US to demonstrate that we now intend to be good citizens of the world.

    To force Iran into honest talks with the threat of sanctions in which Russia, heir lifeline, will participate is a huge step. He doesn't really have to play poker here. In fact, it is in his interests to lay the cards on the table i.e. we are in a position to verify, we are in a position to sanction, and Israel is dying to strike.

    Report Abuse
  • David's Avatar
    Posted by David Mon Sep 28, 2009 8:35am PDT

    This is a good post, illustrating the calm, resolute approach to foreign policy which has been a hallmark of the Obama Administration thus far. The adults are back in charge, after eight years of teenager tantrums setting the tone for US foreign policy. The hyperventilating of the other side is to be expected: they and their leadership failed, and thus everyone else must be judged a failure as well.

    Report Abuse
Comments 1-4 of 4

leave your comment

You must sign in to post a comment

Sign In for personalized information

New User? Sign Up

Updates Chatter on Shine…

Health Byte

Who doesn't want to look hot at all those holiday parties? ExerciseTV shares how to get in skinny jeans-shape -- and quickly!