In the news early this week was a story about how the United States is going to limit its Europe-based missile shield. According to the International Herald Tribune, “The United States has effectively canceled the final phase of a missile defense system based in Europe that was fiercely opposed by Russia and cited repeatedly by the Kremlin as a major obstacle to cooperation on nuclear arms reductions and other issues.” The announcement, made in Washington by Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, explained the shift “as part of a plan to deploy additional ballistic interceptors to counter North Korea.”
Prospects for a U.S. missile shield in Europe have been a major thorn in the side of all recent U.S./Russian relations. From Moscow’s perspective, the shield was part of an American policy to contain Russia, just as were the invitations to Ukraine and Georgia to join NATO. Moscow’s argument was that containment, the misunderstood American policy written by George Kennan at the beginning of the Cold War, was outdated post-1989 and a clear provocation. While the U.S. has insisted that the shield is meant against Iran, and some interceptors may still be placed in Europe, the announcement by Hagel gave a breath of fresh air to the bilateral relations, if not a true restart.
Reading between the lines of the announcement is the undeniable fact that nuclear tests by North Korea have become a mounting concern for the entire international community. Increased sanctions against the bellicose regime were approved by the United Nations Security Council, Russia and China included. For the U.S. to place a missile shield on or near the Korean Peninsula is most reasonable considering the recent threats coming out of Pyongyang. But this does not completely explain the shift in U.S. policy.
My guess is that the United States and Russia are entering a new phase of serious diplomacy. The defeat of the fiercely anti-Russian Mikheil Saakashvili’s party in the recent Georgian election has eliminated a serious obstacle to cooperation. The timeline for Georgia and Ukraine entering NATO is way down the road, if ever. Russia’s entry into the WTO with the help of Switzerland was a major achievement for all sides, and certainly eased tensions.
The last part of the first line of the IHT article is most intriguing. What does “and other issues” mean? The situation in Syria continues to degenerate with Russia, and China, supporting the Assad regime. Perhaps discussions are going on to change Russia’s position, or at least to have it cease supplying weapons. In addition, the United States needs Russia’s cooperation to deal with Iran’s nuclear development. These are two areas where serious cooperation between the Russian Federation and the United States would be beneficial. The United States has elegantly come back from the missile shield position; it most certainly will be asking for something in return from Moscow.
People remember the Cuban Missile Crisis as being solved by President Kennedy’s establishing a blockade to intercept Soviet ships carrying missiles to Cuba. Khruschev blinked; the ships turned back and missile bases in Cuba were dismantled in return for the U.S. promising never to invade Cuba. Secretly, the U.S. also agreed that it would dismantle all U.S.-built missiles armed with nuclear warheads aimed at the Soviet Union which were deployed in Italy and Turkey. In reality, both sides compromised, the essence of good diplomacy.
The rationale of moving missile interceptors from Europe near or on the Korean Peninsula is a diplomatic move that opens the way for increased cooperation between the United States and the Russian Federation. It is an encouraging sign, and we will eagerly watch to see what “other issues” will mean. Minimally, it is a sign that serious negotiations are taking place.