Peter Brookes on Missile Defense Shields
The Heritage Foundation‘s Peter Brookes writes about President Obama’s rejection of missile defense shields in Poland and the Czech Republic that would protect the region from Iranian attacks, in the face of Russia’s opposition. (Source)
Brookes makes a very important point that should be discussed more often that it is (emphasis added):
“Not only does this make us look weak by giving in to the Russian demand, there’s also the delicious irony that Moscow is largely responsible for the Iran problem today, dating back to help the Kremlin gave the mullahs in the 1990s.”
Not only that, but Russia has refused to issue tougher sanctions against Iran in exchange for our dropping the missile shield plans, yet Obama’s ready to drop them anyway. Why? Obama wants to meet with Iran to discuss its nuclear program, but as Brookes points out, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said he wouldn’t submit to demands over his program or buckle under tougher sanctions. Brookes adds:
“Nor has Tehran paused its nuclear/ballistic-missile work since Obama took office, despite White House attempts to extend a hand of friendship to the Islamic regime…In fact, Israel believes Iran will have a bomb within one to two years – and the U.S. Air Force assesses Tehran could have an ICBM that can reach the United States by 2015.”
The word why pops up frequently when discussing Obama’s missile defense strategy, which seems counterintuitive. Why, for instance, is he foregoing “our best short-term defense” to placate the former Soviet Union and giving rogue states the benefit of the doubt?
Tags: Barack Obama, Czech Republic, Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Peter Brookes, Poland, Russia