| Other Photos |
 |
|
 |
Congress Appears in Anti-Missile Defense Issue
// Washington is getting ready for talks with Moscow
For the first time, Washington agreed on Friday to make concessions to Moscow in the anti-missile defense issue. The U.S. said it is ready to enter talks with Russia in September, concerning this and other issues worrying Moscow. It happened after heads of two influential subcommittees of the U.S. Congress criticized Washington’s plans to deploy a missile defense system in Europe, and suggested taking into account the opinion of “protesting Russia”.
“Russia has recently suggested to us expanding our strategic dialogue with it. We agree,” said U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Daniel Fried during a specially-summoned press conference on Friday. He explained that the negotiations with Moscow will begin in September, in the 2-2 format (foreign and defense ministers). Four working groups, -- on missile defense, on the CFE, on reprofiling the warheads for Trident strategic ballistic missiles, and on the SNF-1 treaty, -- will be formed on Russia’s initiative. It means Washington is ready to discuss with Moscow, at a sufficiently high level, almost all security issues worrying Russia.
Stormy debates in the U.S. Congress on the White House’s plans to deploy missile defense in Europe preceded this unexpected statement of the high-placed U.S. diplomat. Daniel Fried and his colleague, Assistant Secretary of State for International Security and Nonproliferation John Rood, reported on the missile defense program’s implementation to the Congress. They urged Congressmen to support the U.S. president’s request and allocate $310 million in the 2008 financial year for deploying ten intercepting missiles in Poland and a radar in the Czech Republic. Fried and Rood claimed the missile defense system will protect Europe and the U.S. from the potential threat from Iran, the country that will become able by 2015 to launch intercontinental missiles, according to U.S. intelligence data.
Both diplomats assured the Congress that the missiles to be deployed in Poland “do not have offensive potential,” and thus do not pose danger to neighboring countries. Fried said that Washington does not plan secret reprofiling of the missiles’ launch tubes for turning them into strike weapons. He said it is impossible, anyway. Fried focused on Moscow’s position of taking all U.S. missile initiatives as the threat to its own national security. “Ten defense missiles cannot be used against Russia’s hundreds of missiles and thousands of warheads, and the Russians know this,” he concluded.
However, the Congress responded extremely negatively to the White House’s suggestions. Head of the Subcommittee on European Countries Robert Wexler (D) and head of the Subcommittee on Terrorism and Nonproliferation Brad Sherman (D) spoke in response to Fried and Rood.
Wexler completely supported the decision to decline the White House’s request for allocating $160 million for missile deployment in Poland, adopted by the Congress’ Subcommittee on Armed Forces on Wednesday. “I am deeply concerned over the U.S. administration’s hurry to deploy the missile defense system, and over its impact on the relations with our allies in Europe,” he said.
It was not accidental that Wexler mentioned relations with allies. Many European politicians have recently spoken disapprovingly of the U.S. initiative. German Chancellor Angela Merkel said back in March that Washington should have at first discussed its plans with the EU. “Europe wants to know why Washington chose to held bilateral talks only with Poland and the Czech Republic, if the missile program is for protecting Europe?” Wexler asked the State Department representatives. “Has any Western European country allocated at least 1 euro for that program?” carried on Sherman. Condoleezza Rice’s assistants did not answer those questions.
The Congress was even more concerned over Moscow’s reaction to Washington’s plans. “Russia is protesting more and more,” Wexler said. Sherman added that it is much more important for the U.S. to cooperate with Russia on Iran, than spoil relations over the missile defense system. “I cannot find a better way to make Russia stop objecting to Iran’s nuclear program than to locate our missiles on the territory of their former allies,” the congressman said. Daniel Fried assured the Congress that “consultations with Russia will go on”: “We hope that the Russians will cooperate with us, despite their rhetoric.” Yet, this statement was taken skeptically by the Congress, and this skepticism was later justified by the tough statement of Russia’s General Staff commander Yuri Baluevsky that “deploying U.S. missile defense in Europe will begin a new round of uncontrollable arms race.” In the end, the Congress agreed to allocate funds only for examining the missile defense system’s operational reliability.
Russia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs was satisfied by the discussion in the U.S. Congress. “Washington’s arguments in favor of deploying the missile defense in Europe will not do for us. Apparently, there is a similar point of view in the U.S. political elite,” the Ministry said. However, head of the Federation Council’s Committee on International Affairs Mikhail Margelov said: “U.S. elite is far from being delighted by the missile project, and it manifests itself in the discussions on the Capitol Hill. There has never existed a Soviet-style touching unity of opinions there.”
Apparently, this lack of unity in Washington begins playing into Moscow’s hands.
Alexander Gabuev
All the Article in Russian as of May 05, 2007
|
|
|
