|
||
|
|
|
President Obama Must Not Surrender to Russia on Missile Defense The authors, respectively director and senior policy analyst in European Affairs, at the Margaret Thatcher Center for Freedom at The Heritage Foundation, believe that President Obama has linked abandonment of the "third site" missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic with achievement of a U.S.-Russian agreement. The agreement would reduce nuclear stockpiles by some 30% over seven years as well as reducing the American long-range bomber fleet to a level of parity with Russia’s. For the president, this U.S.-Russian nuclear reduction seems to be part of his overall goal of creating a nuclear free world. The president’s reluctance to support the "third site" option appears based upon his perception that missile defense has yet to be shown to be effective, although since 2002, thirty-seven of the thirty-eight air, ground, and sea intercepts were, in fact, successful. The most probable future threat, according to the authors, comes from Iran and its demonstrated successful launch of the Sajjil 2 solid-fuel ballistic missile, which has a range of up to 1,500 miles, capable of hitting Israel today and, according to the authors' sources, capable of striking the U.S. by 2015. The authors also refer to statements by Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, supported by International Atomic Energy Agency assessments, that Iran has already amassed sufficient uranium to build an atomic bomb. Gardiner and McNamara therefore urge Congress to support the 2013 completion and deployment of the third-site missile defense system because not doing so would represent an unacceptable accommodation to an increasingly aggressive Russia, a betrayal of two of America's closest allies in Europe, thwart potential membership of Georgia and the Ukraine in NATO and the EU, and signal the loss of U.S. strategic influence in the region.
|
|||
 |
|
