Gates: ‘Genuine interest’ in Russia on missile defense

Gates: ‘Genuine interest’ in Russia on missile defense

By Philip Ewing Thursday, June 9th, 2011 3:38 pm
Posted in International

The proposed American and European missile defense shield is a reliable boogeyman in Russian politics, as we’ve written before, but Secretary Gates said Thursday he believes there’s a real chance that Moscow and the West will eventually come to an accord. Speaking after a top-level NATO meeting in Brussels, Belgium, Gates acknowledged that it’s one of the thorniest points of contention, and he had no breakthroughs to report — but there is some progress:

Said Gates:

One of the key issues in the NATO-Russia relationship is missile defense, and in a separate bilateral meeting with Russian Minister of Defense Serdyukov, we reviewed the active efforts of our defense teams to lay the practical groundwork for cooperation on missile defense in Europe.  While I had hoped we would be ready to move ahead on this subject in the NATO-Russia Council, it is clear that we will need more time. The Department of Defense remains committed to working with the Russian Ministry of Defense in support of our Presidents’ instructions at Deauville, and it was encouraging to hear the strong consensus support at the NATO-Russia Council for practical cooperation on missile defense directed against threats from outside Europe, such as Iran, and not against each other.


That might not sound like much, but in diplo-speak, it would be forward progress for the Russians to officially agree that a Euro-missile defense system is for Iran and not their own nuclear arsenal.

Gates said in response to a reporter’s question that he believes the Russians do have some “genuine interest” in an agreement on missile defense — as opposed to just using it as an outrage line for domestic audiences. We can get to the finish line from here, he suggested:

I think that the Russians have questions about — particularly the longer-term nature of the — of the missile defense capability.  I do think they’re serious.  I have — from the very first meetings I had in Russia with President — then President Putin in 2007 through my meetings with President Medvedev earlier this year and my meetings with Minister Serdyukov, I think that they have responded with interest in our suggestions in terms of how information sharing might work, how we might to work together on this.  I still think there are those in Russia who are skeptical of our motives.  And so I think that we just need to keep working at this.

I think that the proposals for the data centers that were first made by the Russians some months ago and that we’ve since elaborated and that I conveyed back to them in more concrete terms when I was in Moscow — I think there’s genuine interest in that.  And I think there is genuine interest in the joint analysis of the missile threat that we’ve — that we’ve agreed to do.

So I think we just have to take this a step at a step — a step at a time.  I think that the Russians have a long history of hostility and wariness about missile defense, and so I just think we have to keep working at it with them.

 

Join the Conversation

dirtylodown June 9th, 2011 at 4:03 pm

Of course they are serious, they cant beat it. But if you allow them to win on this. It shows our weakness.

Guest June 9th, 2011 at 5:04 pm

This whole thing stinks.

The chance of Iran launching an ICBM/IRBM against Europe is 0. Any nuclear/biological attack would be met with a response that would dwarf any attack Iran could muster.

It’s mainly a diplomatic ploy to entice eastern European countries to lean towards the west and beef up their SAM sites against any potential Russian aggression. It could be a move to deploy far reaching radars near Russian’s border to monitor air traffic inside their airspace.

Oblat June 9th, 2011 at 5:19 pm

Yep it’s ironic that having been freed from Soviet occupation places like Poland want to see an American one.
Meanwhile Germany and France are getting closer and closer to Russia every day. The Poles were never very good at geopolitics — they will end up squeezed in the middle economically and have to capitulate.

Forrest Cantrell June 9th, 2011 at 5:21 pm

I’d say if I were Poland, I’d be happy to see it enabled. Just too many memories of Russians rolling over the border …

Thunder350 June 9th, 2011 at 5:24 pm

While I’m all for missile defense… Iran wouldn’t attack Europe, they’d want #1 Israel, and #2 The United States. The 2nd one being far beyond their capabilities, but Israel is a easy, close, and small target. And they said before they want to “wipe them off the map”

With a ICBM ofcourse. :)

Thunder350 June 9th, 2011 at 6:10 pm

You are correct. The Iranians didn’t say it. Ahmadinejad did.

Thanks for correcting me.

And I wasn’t connecting missile defense in Poland to protecting Israel.. was just saying who Iran’s likely targets are. And know we are being lied to (like normal) about the true reasons why we want missile defense in Eastern Europe.

Tritium June 9th, 2011 at 9:11 pm

No need to correct yourself…Ahmadinejad is the President of Iran, if he said it (and I remember when he did), he said it as the chief representative of his country and it’s “policies”. I don’t remember ANYONE in the Iranian government denouncing his statements.

Tritium June 9th, 2011 at 9:12 pm

Whatever agreement is reached with the Russians, it better NOT involve any transfer of ABM technology that we have developed. Zero…nadda!

Bronco46 June 9th, 2011 at 9:59 pm

The Russian’s interest in this matter are how can we steal this technology and failing that how can we get these idiot American’s to stab another ally in the back.
If Gates actually believes what he’s quoted as saying; he’s lost touch with oath to defend this country and it’s interests.

Thunder350 June 9th, 2011 at 10:22 pm

True, but my statement of “Iranians” implies all, not just the leader(s). I’d like to think the citizens (especially the ones who have tried to rise up and get democracy there) have more sense, and aren’t blood thirsty.

Tritium June 9th, 2011 at 10:29 pm

That’s my fear, exactly! The benefits to the USA are zero, the benefits to the Ruskies (especially if they acquire sensitive technology) is incalcuable. And if and when they get it, be assured it will be sold off to the Chinese, the North Koreans, and anyone else who will pay. I don’t trust Putin…never have, never will. He’s not even a classy ex-KGB spook, he really is kind of sleazy and sinister.

seesthrubs June 10th, 2011 at 12:18 am

My my watch a paranoid, misinformed bunch we have…lets burst a few bubbles.

“Of course they are serious, they cant beat it.“
You think? For starters US ABM efforts are still only in development. Russia is also currently developing a new generation of ICBMs with countermeasures etc to counter ABMs.

“Just too many memories of Russians rolling over the border …“
The Poles rolled East more than a few times as well. You should really read some objective history texts.

“Whatever agreement is reached with the Russians, it better NOT involve any transfer of ABM technology that we have developed. Zero…nadda!“
Highly unlikely because Russia has had ABM systems since the 70s and already have an excellent ABM base in the S-400 which are already deployed in an ABM role. They have done just fine with their own tech and may contribute their tech to a Euro missile shield.

Yes we all know the Iranian threat is overblown but as for the real reason thats not as transparent. The fact is the only excuse that can be used to develop such a system is rogue nations when the true threat is much larger — China. This system will be at first developed and deployed to meet the “threat” of Iran and when fully operational you quickly see if pop up in places like Japan, Korea, Western US. Russia was obviously suspicious of such a system but China is also a threat to them and gradually they are being brought on board since they can not only help with the system but have some good potential sites.

If China does start throwing its weight around and we have a Cold War 2 China will start with a massive strategic disadvantage — as if NATO started the Cold War with a Star Wars defense system in place. In effect –game changing.

freefallingbomb June 11th, 2011 at 4:39 pm

To the poster “Tritium”

———————————

Part 1 / 3

You wrote: “The benefits to the USA are zero, the benefits to the Ruskies (especially if they acquire sensitive technology) is incalcuable. And if and when they get it, be assured it will be sold off to the Chinese, the North Koreans, and anyone else who will pay. I don’t trust Putin…never have, never will.”

(Continued)

freefallingbomb June 11th, 2011 at 4:39 pm

Part 2 / 3

1) In relation to the Russians “stealing” your unique technology: If you invite any ally to cooperate with you on a strategic plan, or every time you export your weaponry to allies, its technologies inevitably get divulged to foreigners, too, no matter what “safeguard clauses” you impose on them. Or can you possibly avoid that? (I want to buy a F-22)

(Plus: Are you sure there are so many brilliant, proven U.S. American A.B.M. systems out there? The fact that you could probably also learn a great deal about Russian A.B.M. technology by just BUYING their anti-aircraft / anti-stealth / anti-missile S-400s, but refuse to even ASK them if they’re for sale, only proves that PRIDE and STUPIDITY are two sides of the SAME coin, so come down from your high horse already!)

(Continued)

freefallingbomb June 11th, 2011 at 4:39 pm

Part 3 / 3

2) In relation to the insinuation that the Russians eagerly share all their military secrets, even their stolen ones, with the Chinese (their only other potential threat right now, although a much smaller threat than the U.S.A.), almost acting as Communist China’s agents or “accomplices in some Oriental conspiracy to destroy the virginal West” : If that’s what you REALLY believe, then you need therapy. Seriously.

If the Russians sell an aircraft carrier (the “Varyag”) to the Chinese and the filthy Brits also sell an aircraft carrier to the very same Chinese (the “H.M.S. Ark Royal”), the Russians are (still) atheistic, Communist, deceitful, militaristic, apocalyptic, “evil” Asian invaders to you but the British are (still) good-hearted, loyal, Democratic, Freedom-loving, Christian, free-market-defending, staunch allies?

Ah of course: You Anglos are all from the same clan. So this is your real criterium for war and peace.

STemplar June 12th, 2011 at 3:44 am

The argument is semantics as to whether the phrase ‘wiped off a map’ even exists in Persian and the tense of verbs. It’s all bullshit of course, because the intent of his statement is clear whether the literal translation is or not.

Gregory Savage June 12th, 2011 at 4:30 pm

There are other benefits to alliance then just technical.

Oblat June 12th, 2011 at 6:03 pm

I find it unlikely that Templar speaks for the Iranians

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement