Picture
The Patriot Missile
Sometimes you just have to cut your loses and start over. Apparently this is what the Obama administration has decided to do with the long awaited European missile defense shield. I can't say that I'm sad to see it go.

The Bush era missile defense scheme for Europe had as much credibility as Gaddafi's son's thesis on the democratization. The system, which to date has cost the US close to a billion dollars, wouldn't have been able to effectively defend against an attack of more than two missiles, distinguish between a simple decoy and real missile, or identify a missile as such if its nose cone was covered with a shiny, metallic shell. And that is just a short list of its failings.

For more details, check out the East-West Institute's report on Iran's ballistic missile program and America's response; section 4 is particularly informative.

While I'm happy to see thisineffective cash-cow go the way of the dinosaur, I can't help but find the timing of the move particularly interesting.  Anyone else think this is an attempt to curry favor with Russia in advance of what will surely be tough negotiations on sanction for Iran?

-Evan

More after the jump -->
Update 1- Dmitry Rogozin, Russia's ambassador to the NATO, used a particularly Russian metaphor to describe Moscow's attitude toward the US decision: "It's like having a decomposing corpse in your flat - and then the mortician comes and takes it away." Thanks for that one Dmo.

Update 2- Republicans in Congress are doing their best to turn the announcement into a political issue.

From the AP:

"Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl called the decision 'dangerous and short-sighted. The message the administration sends today is clear: The United States will not stand behind its friends and views 're-setting' relations with Russia more important,' said the Arizona senator. 'This is wrong!'"

And…

"Rep. Eric Cantor of Virgina, the second-ranking Republican in the House, said he would 'work to overturn this wrong-headed policy.'

'Scrapping our missile defense effort in Europe has severe consequences for our diplomatic relations and weakens our national security,' Cantor said in a statement. 'Our allies, especially Poland and the Czech Republic, deserve better and our people deserve smarter and safer.'"
 


Comments

Garrett
09/17/2009 11:40

Ironic that Republicans are portrayed as the party with strong foreign policy credentials. I would hope they would learn not to view the world in such simplistic terms.

Reply
Jon
09/17/2009 12:17

I've always felt that if missile defense really worked, you'd see it happen in Israel first--where the demand is acute. As of yet, I haven't seen any qassams or katyushas exploding in mid-air.

Reply
09/17/2009 12:55

The big issue for me is that even as the technology improves (see the Aegis program for a relative success story) the utility of ballistic missile defense is still waning. The introduction and proliferation of nuclear technology means that even a high probability of success isn't good enough.

For more check out this relatively old, but still highly relevant article by physicist Wolfgang K. H. Panofsky: http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2001_06/panjun01

8 years on, Panofsky's analysis still rings true.

Reply



Leave a Reply

Loading
try {var pageTracker = _gat._getTracker("UA-9284776-1");pageTracker._trackPageview(); } catch(err) {}