Published: Sunday, September 27, 2009
GUEST COMMENTARY / DEFENSE
Shift in Europe missile strategy thoughtful, sensible
President Obama’s decision to refocus the deployment of unproven missile defense systems to Europe is about one thing: strengthening our national security. The president’s plan will defend United States service members, our partners in the Middle East, and our allies in Europe from the clear threat posed by Iran.
In 2006, the Bush administration proposed deploying an unproven missile defense system to counter the potential threat of a long-range missile launched by Iran. Since this time, the threat posed by Iran has changed dramatically. According to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Iran has accelerated its development of short and medium-range missiles and slowed its development of long-range missiles.
Iran’s existing short and medium range missile arsenal poses a direct threat to U.S. troops in the Middle East and Europe as well as our allies. Whereas the Bush-era plan would have done nothing to counter this clear and present threat to our national security, the new plan will put field-tested missile defense systems into service right away.
As a member of the subcommittee in the House of Representatives that oversees missile defense, I am confident that President Obama’s new plans will be more effective in protecting our service members and allies, as well as deterring Iranian aggression.
Some have argued that President Obama’s announcement indicates that he is giving in to Russia. I strongly disagree.
First, European missile defense is designed to counter the threat from a few missiles launched from Iran, not the thousands of missiles in Russia’s silos. We want Russia to recognize Iran for what it is: a potential threat to Russia, Europe and the Middle East. We have a strong national security interest in countering and dissuading an Iranian missile threat — effective missile defense should not be a pawn in what some people are portraying as a cold war chess game.
Second, the United States is not backing away from Russia’s main source of discontent — the deepening security ties between the United States and former Warsaw Pact countries such as Poland and the Czech Republic. President Obama is clear: We welcome a tighter security relationship with Poland and the Czech Republic, including the possible deployment of American missile defense systems that will counter the short and intermediate-range missile threat from Iran.
Finally, Obama’s critics will have to answer a basic question: How much longer will U.S. servicemen and women and their families deployed in Europe or the Middle East have to wait for protection from Iran’s existing missiles? Under Bush-era plans, the answer was 2020, if then. Under President Obama’s plan, the answer is 2011.
This decision is no trade-off. It is a huge win for national security.
U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Everett) is a member of the Armed Services Committee.
In 2006, the Bush administration proposed deploying an unproven missile defense system to counter the potential threat of a long-range missile launched by Iran. Since this time, the threat posed by Iran has changed dramatically. According to Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Iran has accelerated its development of short and medium-range missiles and slowed its development of long-range missiles.
Iran’s existing short and medium range missile arsenal poses a direct threat to U.S. troops in the Middle East and Europe as well as our allies. Whereas the Bush-era plan would have done nothing to counter this clear and present threat to our national security, the new plan will put field-tested missile defense systems into service right away.
As a member of the subcommittee in the House of Representatives that oversees missile defense, I am confident that President Obama’s new plans will be more effective in protecting our service members and allies, as well as deterring Iranian aggression.
Some have argued that President Obama’s announcement indicates that he is giving in to Russia. I strongly disagree.
First, European missile defense is designed to counter the threat from a few missiles launched from Iran, not the thousands of missiles in Russia’s silos. We want Russia to recognize Iran for what it is: a potential threat to Russia, Europe and the Middle East. We have a strong national security interest in countering and dissuading an Iranian missile threat — effective missile defense should not be a pawn in what some people are portraying as a cold war chess game.
Second, the United States is not backing away from Russia’s main source of discontent — the deepening security ties between the United States and former Warsaw Pact countries such as Poland and the Czech Republic. President Obama is clear: We welcome a tighter security relationship with Poland and the Czech Republic, including the possible deployment of American missile defense systems that will counter the short and intermediate-range missile threat from Iran.
Finally, Obama’s critics will have to answer a basic question: How much longer will U.S. servicemen and women and their families deployed in Europe or the Middle East have to wait for protection from Iran’s existing missiles? Under Bush-era plans, the answer was 2020, if then. Under President Obama’s plan, the answer is 2011.
This decision is no trade-off. It is a huge win for national security.
U.S. Rep. Rick Larsen (D-Everett) is a member of the Armed Services Committee.
Comments
(