Deveselu: Is the Shield Viable?

In early February, a press release in Washington described the difficulties of one project among the hundreds of new U.S. military projects: the American interceptor missiles in Deveselu, Romania. The press release stirred up television and radio networks, newspapers, media agencies, presidential and governmental offices and the U.S. embassy in the host country. The negative consequences of the former Băsescu “monopoly” on U.S.-Romanian relations, consolidated over a long period of time — eight years — have been confirmed yet again: (1) The bilateral “dialogue” has become a one-way street in the direction of Washington to Bucharest and in a relationship of decider to performer; and (2) The aggravated, continual and unconstitutional lack of responsibility with which Traian Băsescu insists on treating this country by declaring, on the occasion of the press release, that Romania risks being labeled an “unpredictable state” (?!) in the same manner as Somalia, with its pirates and Islamic insurgents; North Korea, with its famine and nuclear weapons; Afghanistan, with its narco-governments and eternal insecurity; and Cambodia, with its minefields and gun-wielding Red Khmers.

And the immediate reminder of these faults — which, along with Băsescu uncannily remaining in office, persist in the U.S.-Romanian bilateral relationship — is that the aforementioned news triggered confusion and overreactions. From the president’s laughing response, unbecoming of his office, to Mircea Geoană’s emphatic reassurance, seeming always to be “just back from Washington” and “just after a significant talk,” saying that “everything will be alight,” to the balanced statements, in a European context, of Defense Minister Mircea Dușa, almost nothing remains unsaid. Almost nothing, that is, except for the explanations duly owed to Romanians by the current political powers. For eight years, Romanians have been kept in the dark and served only lies regarding the options, capabilities and actions of the U.S. toward Romania and, likewise, of Romania toward the U.S. These explanations are on the same level as those being given to the Euro-Atlantic public, Romania’s partners in the common areas of the EU and NATO.

The Latest GAO Report and Romania

The GAO, (U.S. Government Accountability Office) is more than the equivalent of a Court of Accounts in a European country, as its name might imply. Rather, it is the instrument for financial audits of the U.S. Congress, but it is also involved in project assessments, open and undercover investigations, investigations of legal and judiciary expertise and so on. The GAO is a nonpartisan, high-performance agency with an old and solid reputation. It has been nicknamed both the “Congress watchdog” and “taxpayer’s best friend” because of its benefits to both the governors and the governed in disclosing wasted funds and deficiencies in management, design, technology and the like. The GAO prepares about 900 reports a year concerning all operations of the government and government agencies — everything from the federal budget to human resources, pensions and social insurance, international business, advanced nanotechnology production and defense.

A recent classified GAO report, revealed to the public by the Associated Press, states that the U.S. anti-missile system being deployed in Romania and Poland is ineffective and cannot ensure the protection of the U.S. and its European allies. The report also states that in times of financial austerity — such as the present — Congress might stop this uncertain project. According to the report, Pentagon officials believe that the project undermines relations with Russia and the potential for mutual reduction of nuclear weapons in the future — a priority for President Obama. The GAO also claims that the U.S. Missile Defense Agency has concluded that Romania is not a suitable location for installment of a missile defense system to protect the U.S. Finally, the blue book quotes another expert report that recommends abandoning the project and moving the interceptors to the East Coast.

The GAO report received minor commentary in the U.S. media. Opinions were rather unfavorable, due to the futility of the project and the desire to reduce military spending. An editorial titled, “GAO Study … Euro-Missile Defense Not Effective,” published Feb. 9 in Veterans Today, expressed a radical viewpoint: “The position that a missile defense shield is needed to protect Europe from an attack by Iran is totally ridiculous and no military or government entity has ever made even an attempt at a reasonable case for it. The forward deployment is an obvious Cold War re-stimulation against the Russians, an offensive move under the guise of a defensive one. This begins a new arms race … of sorts, which is the bottom line of why you see it being pushed. If you look at all the supporters, the people, entities and contractors involved, it does not take a genius to see another financial raping of the taxpayers here.” A reader posted the following comment: “The Romanian army has absolutely no say in regard to the missile defense operations. The U.S. forces have total control over the operations and are not accountable to the Romanian government. The land in which the missile base is located was rented — the former Deveselu base, 35 miles southeast of Pitești — and thus Romania became a nuclear target. The defense system in Deveselu is helpless against Russian Iskander missiles, U.S. experts claim. Also, the version of Iskander missiles with the 2,000 km range can destroy the entire U.S. missile defense shield in Eastern Europe. All the talk about interceptors in Romania is nonsense, and what is absolutely amazing is that, concerning these missiles, Romania’s populace is entirely uninformed.”

Clearly, the GAO report isn’t the best possible news and does not bode well for the future of the project. The U.S. Embassy in Bucharest stated that the U.S. will remain committed to protecting its national territory and citizens as well as its European NATO partners. These welcome statements were the only qualified stances on the subject that could somewhat restore trust among the Romanian public. This is the same public that doesn’t give two cents about the “optimistic” words of Băsescu, empty words dissimulating hope that the GAO report won’t become a reality, because — let’s not beat around the bush — he desperately believes that the story with Deveselu, if fully accomplished, will bring about his beloved dream of immunity ….

Public opinion in Romania seems to be caught off guard by these unpleasant topics. The controversies, stalling, errors and failures of the U.S. in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union were, inexplicably, taboo subjects in Romania after the fall of communism. Likewise, the stupid story of the “Great Glow Worm” is another of Băsescu’s tricks, devised to avoid using the word “U.S.A.” when there would be criticisms against it or against the suspended president’s obedient relationship with the “master.”

If, as is done in Western Europe, over the years the media had told Romanians about the not-always-successful U.S. policies in Eastern Europe — which is absolutely natural — or about the friction — also natural — between the U.S. and Western Europe; if Romanians had woken up a bit earlier since the referendums of last winter and this summer; and if they had said, four or five years ago, a determined “no” to the national outlaw Cotroceni and his phantom “party” — if all these things had happened around 2007-2009, then the latest GAO report would not have produced such confusion. Understanding, mutual knowledge and U.S.-Romanian relations would have gone much further.

(To be continued)