Courting Russia
As we all know, American President Barack Obama said he would transfer the American missile shield former President George W. Bush intended to establish in Poland or Czechoslovakia to the Balkans or the eastern Mediterranean near Iran’s boundaries. At the same time, Obama clarified that the shield is to focus on a real target; i.e., Shahab-3 instead of long-range missiles that Iran cannot manufacture before 2015. As such, the American head of state was relatively successful in breaking the ice in Russian-American relations. This step also helped reassure Israel and a number of Mid-Eastern countries about Iran’s medium-range missiles, which are of two miles range and can reach southern Europe. In addition, Obama is cementing his country’s negotiating capabilities as direct dialogues with Iran draw closer.
Certainly, Obama relieved the fears of Russians who repeatedly opposed the idea of the missile shield. They said it almost breached their southern boundaries and consequently regarded it as a real threat to Russia’s national security rather than only being directed at Iran.
On the other hand, Republicans responded to Obama’s strategic surprise that destroyed Bush’s missile shield plan with anger and condemnation. What is more, Obama was accused of neglecting U.S. security and losing grounds in the first battle with the Russians.
However, Obama’s new plan gained spasms of American public opinion applause. That is because it is less expensive, but more realistic and fruitful. Actually, it does not make sense to build an “exorbitant” missile shield to confront the menaces of long-range Iranian missiles that Tehran is yet to produce, while medium-range missiles stand as a tangible source of danger!
No one would deny that such a daring plan will work to bring Russians and Americans together with respect to dialogue about nuclear non-proliferation, especially after the Zsolt Convention is to end next January. Perhaps this will urge Russia to exert more pressure on Iran to conclude a swift settlement to Iranian nuclear development. That settlement would undoubtedly guarantee stripping Iran of its capabilities to manufacture a nuclear bomb.
Certainly, Obama relieved the fears of Russians who repeatedly opposed the idea of the missile shield. They said it almost breached their southern boundaries and consequently regarded it as a real threat to Russia’s national security rather than only being directed at Iran.
On the other hand, Republicans responded to Obama’s strategic surprise that destroyed Bush’s missile shield plan with anger and condemnation. What is more, Obama was accused of neglecting U.S. security and losing grounds in the first battle with the Russians.
However, Obama’s new plan gained spasms of American public opinion applause. That is because it is less expensive, but more realistic and fruitful. Actually, it does not make sense to build an “exorbitant” missile shield to confront the menaces of long-range Iranian missiles that Tehran is yet to produce, while medium-range missiles stand as a tangible source of danger!
No one would deny that such a daring plan will work to bring Russians and Americans together with respect to dialogue about nuclear non-proliferation, especially after the Zsolt Convention is to end next January. Perhaps this will urge Russia to exert more pressure on Iran to conclude a swift settlement to Iranian nuclear development. That settlement would undoubtedly guarantee stripping Iran of its capabilities to manufacture a nuclear bomb.