Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko gives interview in his office in the Ministry's headquarters at Smolenskaya square in Moscow.
Photo: Êèðèëë Ëåáåäåâ
|
 |
Europe Should Not Have U.S.-Configured Missile Defense
// Russia is ready to respond to U.S. plans
Russia’s Deputy Foreign Minister Alexander Grushko told Kommersant’s correspondent Vladimir Soloviev about the dangers that threaten Europe if the U.S. missile defense system is built there.
“Russia-U.S. counteraction on the issue of deploying U.S. missile defense system elements in Europe enters its final phase. Who is winning?”
“Certainly, if the U.S. starts implementing its declared missile defense plans, it will add safety neither to the U.S, nor to Europe, nor to Russia. For the first time since the Cold War end, a strategic U.S. element will appear in Europe. We all will acquire a destabilizing factor of uncertainty in the global security equation. In its turn, it will affect the interests both of Europeans and of Americans. We do not want such scenario.
We should also keep in mind that missile defense is the most serious issue in the U.S.-Europe relations. The truth is that Europe (neither the EU nor the U.S. allies in NATO) did not ask Washington to protect it from the Iranian missile threat in the way which the U.S. wants to implement. The U.S. found two countries that gave preliminary agreement for these plans to be implemented. These facts prove that we deal with not just a purely military issue, but also a political one. The EU did not discuss these issues with us, and repeatedly said the decision should be found by Moscow-Washington interaction with using the Russia-NATO Council’s resources.
We hope these issues will be discussed most widely not only with Americans, but also with the EU, because it is extremely important for European security. Our offers are aimed at solving the missile defense issue by means of increasing diplomatic efforts on the basis of realistic estimation of missile threats, whether they exist or not.”
“By offering the Gabala radar’s joint use to the U.S., Russia seems to have acknowledged the necessity of the missile defense system…”
“It is not missile defense. The Gabala radar will allow tracing the presence/absence of military threats. It can detect any missile launch, including a test launch, in the Middle East region. By the way, at least 4 or 5 years pass between a test launch, if there is such, and a missile’s coming into operational service. Thus, the international community will have enough time to take measures. That would be a response to real missile threats, which do not exist now.”
“Anyway, will the U.S. missile defense appear in Europe?”
“I assume we are not yet through the entire diplomatic process. Important consultations with the U.S. and talks in the Russia-NATO Council await us. We hope to find a decision which will allow solving the issue by political and diplomatic means, so as not to risk deforming the strategic stability system in its current state.”
“In other words, Russia expressly shuts out the appearance of missile defense elements in Europe?”
“We stand for discovering ways of lifting non-existent threats not by deploying missile systems, but by a realistic estimation of missile threats. We should keep in mind that a missile threat without mass destruction weapons (MDW) is quite hypothetic. The countries which raise the U.S.’ suspicion will be unable, due to technologic reasons, to create long-range strategic missiles for many years more. Consequently, it is even less likely that they would create MDW to be installed on those missiles. There is no immediate necessity to promote the systems on which the U.S. is now working together with Poland and the Czech Republic. Instead, the world needs political and diplomatic efforts for strengthening the non-proliferation of MDW, missiles, and missile technologies.”
“So, Europe should not have missile defense?”
“Right. In the U.S. configuration, it should not.”
“What if it appears anyway?”
“I believe the EU understands that the U.S. plan might seriously weaken Europe’s security if the interests of Russia and the EU itself are disregarded.”
“Why so?”
“Without its well-defined agreement, Europe will actually become the U.S. forward defense line, with all ensuing consequences.”
“So, Europe might suffer from Russia’s possible response?”
“There exist cast-iron rules in the military sphere. Whenever a certain potential appears, there should always appear a counter-potential. We can keep saying we are not enemies to each other, but submarines are on combat alert duty while we are talking. These are serious things. The military security issues always regard not just political intentions, but also military abilities which exist or might appear. It is no secret for Europe that Russia will definitely take corresponding security measures.”
“Why doesn’t Moscow offer to deploy missile defense in Europe as alternative to the U.S. systems? We could arrange it with, say, Romania and Bulgaria…”
“In fact, we offer a philosophy which is not different from it. However, to do so, we need to make sure there is a real missile threat. Meanwhile, there is no reason to raise the alarm now, and to implement projects for neutralizing non-existent threats. Moreover, the insistence of promoting such projects makes us think there are other purposes.”
“Why would the U.S. need these systems in Europe?”
“First, the U.S. said they need to shield their own country from Iran’s ballistic missiles. Then, the U.S. said they are ready to shield their allies and to secure Russia’s safety. Yet, our data shows that the U.S. will not shield Europe’s entire territory. Moreover, the global missile defense system, which the U.S. is building in the world, including its space-defense layers, definitely affects Russia’s strategic potential. The stability of recent years existed due to the power balance, and there are no reasons so far to change this way of securing safety.”
Interview taken by Vladimir Soloviev
All the Article in Russian as of Oct. 04, 2007
|
|
|
