Wednesday, March 4, 2009

Obama Administration Naivete: Missile Defense Compromise

An Inside Look At The Defense Plans Of The Obama Administration

Taking the media back burner to the the economic nuclear winter that we are currently in, is the state of our foreign defense policy and our missile defense initiative plans in Eastern Europe. This is coupled with our desire, as well as the desire of most of the civilized world, to stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons of it's own.

Russian And US Nuclear Missiles

President Barack Obama sent a secret letter to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev weeks ago suggesting that we would halt development of the United States’ missile defense program in Eastern Europe if Russia helped resolve the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear program.

“If through strong diplomacy with Russia and our other partners we can reduce or eliminate that threat, it obviously shapes the way at which we look at missile defense,” Under Secretary of State William J. Burns said about the Iranian threat in an interview with the Russian news agency Interfax while in Moscow last month delivering Mr. Obama’s letter." (New York Times)

A couple of problems with this line of thinking:

  1. Iran has strongly resisted international efforts to pressure it to abide by its legal commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and halt its suspect nuclear activities. Iran’s President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, defiantly proclaimed in 2007 that “Iran has obtained the technology to produce nuclear fuel, and Iran’s move is like a train…". While that was in '07, where is the evidence to show that the Iranian position has changed.

  2. Russia has cooperated with Tehran on a range of issues and has often resisted Washington's tough stance toward Iran, which insists that its nuclear program is aimed at developing only cheap energy, not weapons. (Washington Post)
The words of the Obama administration are good as they always are. Nobody articulates better than they do. The naivete however is troubling. Iran is a rouge state that has stated openly and clearly what it is they would like the world to look like. Negotiating with them, as said here before, is impossible because you can not believe in the merits of what they say. If my opponent in a Gold Gloves boxing match said that if I put my hands down he would also, I would be a fool to do it. Any agreements made by Iranian leaders in negotiations would no doubt be a stalling tactic that would enable them to continue on their merry nuclear way. In a look back at history, Hitler, given the benefit of the doubt as a man of his word signed The Munich Agreement on his way to invading Poland and starting WW II. Did we learn nothing of what the ramifications of appeasement can be?

Improving relations with Russia (as well as with all allies around the world) is critical. To give up the store for negotiations that would merely be a charade would be nothing less than stupid for loss of a better word. The Obama administration needs to wise up quickly and come to the realization that this world is a dangerous and tricky place. Words, no matter how well they are put together, do not translate into proper action. Repairing foreign relations where they have been damaged is a good and necessary goal, but not at the expense of the security of the United States and her allies.

Look not at the polls President Obama because the polls can be fickle. Look instead at reality. The real reality and not the reality of campaign rhetoric!

No comments :

Post a Comment

;