Thoughts on Ballistic Missile Defense

ID contributor Robert Farley has posted his thoughts on the BMD decision over at the Guardian.

Rob mentions something in his article that I've been thinking about for awhile regarding the Eastern European missile shield floated by the Bush administration. The reaction in Poland and the Czech Republic clearly illustrates that the purpose of the ballistic missiles in those countries was to influence Russia, yet the Bush administration always sold the concept domestically from the political position that the shield protects the US from Iranian ballistic missiles, an obvious disingenuous position. To me, that indicated Bush was sending a signal to Russia that the ballistic missile shield was on the negotiating table for the subject of Iran.

I look at the decision today and see a smart move by Gates, for reasons previously discussed, but believe the politics of this has everything to do with the Obama administration successfully trading the ballistic missile shield deployment to eastern Europe for something in regards to Iran.

France is now 'sure' Iran is working on nukes. Israel is sending every signal it can that it is poised to attack. The IAEA now says Iran has sufficient information to build a bomb. Israel is calling for tough sanctions, and suggests they will attack if tough sanctions aren't applied.

Then there is the immediate effect the timing the Eastern European decision has on Israel. All that equipment heading to Israel for the Juniper Cobra exercise in mid-October is supposedly going to stay put now. That will be useful.

We seem to be heading towards one of two conclusions. Either big time sanctions are applied on Iran, or Israel attacks Iran by the end of the year. Today's actions suggest Russia will support the sanctions, but I guess we will have to wait and see.

As for the non-political side of the BMD events on Thursday, my thoughts are on the USNI Blog: Thinking About Future Ballistic Missile Defense.