The president said he was accepting the recommendation of Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates and Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, in turning away from a plan to place interceptor missiles in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic. Instead, a distributed sensor system, apparently envisioned as a more advanced version of the Navy's Aegis theater missile defense system, would "deploy techniques that are proven and cost-effective and will counter the current threat more effectively and do so sooner" than a longer-range system would, Obama said.

The system embraced by former president George W. Bush had been strongly opposed by Russia, which viewed the prospect of a missile shield system on its western border as an affront. Although Obama made a point of saying his decision was based on security interests rather than diplomatic considerations, it could allay what Obama and Gates called "unfounded" concerns in Moscow about the previous plan and contribute to a breakthrough in U.S.-Russian relations. Scrapping the Bush missile shield also could remove a impediment to negotiations on finding a replacement for the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, or START, which expires in early December.

"This new approach will provide capability sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 European missile defense program," Obama said at the White House. He said the system he is embracing will offer "stronger, smarter and swifter defenses of American forces and America's allies."

Obama said he called the prime ministers of Poland and the Czech Republic overnight to alert them to his decision.

Obama's statement from the White House, hastily arranged after news of the decision leaked out overnight, was followed by a news conference at the Pentagon by Gates and Gen. James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Gates, who as Bush's defense secretary had recommended and publicly embraced the longer-range system, said the option chosen by Obama could be implemented several years earlier and would be more effective, especially since the threat of long-range missiles from Iran is no longer believed to be as imminent.

"It is more adapted to the threat we see developing, and takes advantage of" the latest technology available to the United States, Gates said.

The decision sparked immediate condemnation from Republicans in Congress, who accused the administration of abandoning America's allies and putting the country's security at risk. House Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement that the move "does little more than empower Russia and Iran at the expense of our allies in Europe. It shows a willful determination to continue ignoring the threat posed by some of the most dangerous regimes in the world."

That concern was echoed by Obama's chief rival during the 2008 campaign, Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who called the move away from a missile system designed to counter long-range weapons "seriously misguided."

"Given the serious and growing threats posed by Iran's missile and nuclear programs, now is the time when we should look to strengthen our defenses, and those of our allies," McCain said in a statement. "Missile defense in Europe has been a key component of this approach."

In his briefing, Gates anticipated those criticisms, and fired back strongly. "Those who say we are scrapping missile defense in Europe are either misinformed or misrepresenting the reality of what we are doing," Gates said. "The security of Europe has been a vital national interest of the United States for my entire career. The circumstances, borders and threats may have changed, but that commitment continues."

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who was a strong critic of the Bush shield, called Obama's decision "brilliant" and hailed it as "a giant step forward."

While Bush's shield proposal had received strong support from the governments of the potential host countries, there was deep opposition among Polish and Czech citizens. Polls taken earlier this year showed that about 70 percent of Czechs opposed the missile defense plan, and such resistance kept the Czech Parliament from ratifying the agreement. The issue played a part in the ouster this spring of Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek, who championed the missile shield.

When Obama visited Prague in April, several hundred Czechs marched in the capital to decry the proposal, carrying balloons and placards, including one that read, "Yes We Can -- Say No to Missile Shield."

Critics of the Bush system had said it addressed a threat that didn't exist, using missiles that might not work. The system was aimed at shooting down long-range ballistic missiles, which Iran is not expected to have until at least 2015, if it develops them, according to arms-control experts. The system was not intended to deal with Iran's medium-range missiles, which are currently capable of hitting Turkey and the edge of Europe, analysts said.

In addition, the two-stage missiles that were supposed to be based in Poland as part of the shield have not been tested.

Supporters of the Bush-proposed system said it could include a layer of missiles to deal with the shorter-range threats. They also argued it was better to have a defense in place against potential Iranian missiles that could hit the United States, rather than wait until they already existed. "You can't just flip a switch and have this technology and these systems in place," said Jeff Kueter, president of the George C. Marshall Institute.

But Gates and Cartwright said Thursday that the new proposal would allow for additions and expansions to defend against longer-range missiles if necessary.

In their Pentagon news briefing, Gates and Cartwright said the new system would be deployed six to seven years earlier than previously planned, expand the range of coverage and increase the capability to knock down several missiles at a time. The changes are in response to what Gates described as the growing threat of Iranian short- and medium-range ballistic missiles.

"The intelligence community now assesses that the threat from Iran's short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, such as the Shahab-3, is developing more rapidly than previously projected," Gates said. "This poses an increased and more immediate threat to our forces on the European continent, as well as to our allies."

Cartwright said the rapid proliferation of such missiles by both Iran and North Korea drove the decision to change the missile defense strategy.

"The Iranians are starting to field, as have the . . . North Koreans, capabilities associated with intermediate- and medium-range and short-range ballistic missiles in numbers that are substantially larger than could be addressed by 40 or 10 ground-based interceptors," Cartwright said. "We're talking about hundreds."

At the same time, Gates said the intelligence community had lowered its assessment of the danger posed by Iranian long-range missile developments. "The threat of potential Iranian intercontinental ballistic missile capabilities has been slower to develop than was estimated in 2006," he said.

Meanwhile, technological advances including better sensors have improved the ability of the U.S. military detect, track and shoot down short- and medium-range missiles using interceptors based on land and on ships at sea, Gates said. One of the main advances has been in the military's Standard Missile-3 (SM-3), which has had eight successful test flights since 2007, he said.

As described by Gates and Cartwright, the new missile defense plan will unfold in three stages. By 2011, the Pentagon will deploy Navy Aegis ships equipped with SM-3 interceptors in the eastern Mediterranean that are linked with sensors, giving the military the ability to defend critical infrastructure and U.S. forces in Europe, Cartwright said.

A second phase in about 2015 will field an upgraded, land-based SM-3 in allied countries, and discussions are underway with Poland and the Czech Republic on basing the missiles in their territory, Gates said. The upgraded SM-3, known as the SM-3 Block 1B, will be coupled with airborne sensors that will expand the covered area threefold, Cartwright said.

In 2018, the third phase will deploy a larger and more capable version of the SM-3, known as SM-3 Block 2, which will allow the missile defense shield "to cover the entire land mass of Europe against intermediate and short-range ballistic missiles," Cartwright said. And by perhaps 2020, that system will be made more powerful to be able to intercept intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) fired from Iran at not only Europe but the United States.

However, that future technology is "still to be proven," Cartwright said. For that reason, he said, the U.S. military cannot "abandon or scrap the capabilities that we have today" in the form of ground-based interceptors currently located in Alaska and California to defend the United States against sophisticated ICBM threats.

Russia said it was encouraged by the news of the approach the United States would take but wanted to study the details before commenting more extensively.

"So far, I can say that a possible review of the U.S. position on missile defense would be a positive signal," Foreign Ministry spokesman Andrei Nesterenko told a news briefing, adding that no backroom deal had been struck between Moscow and Washington.

In response to a question, Gates said the Russians "are probably not going to be pleased that we are continuing with missile defense efforts in Europe." But he said two changes "should allay some of their . . . unfounded concerns." One worry was that the radar system planned for the Czech Republic could monitor Russian ICBM launches, and another was that the interceptors in Poland "could be fitted with nuclear weapons" and become an offensive system "for which they would have virtually no warning time," Gates said. He said the SM-3, by contrast, is a weapon that Moscow "simply cannot . . . rationally argue" poses any threat to Russia.

Advocates say the Aegis system has a proven track record. Based on ships in the Black Sea, the Baltic Sea or both, it would be able to protect more of Europe than the Czech-Polish system, they say. Some proponents say the system could also be modified to be based on land to reduce costs and supplemented with a theater-based missile defense system in Turkey.

Ellen Tauscher, Obama's undersecretary of state for arms control and international security, had been a vocal proponent of the Aegis alternative as a member of the House Armed Services Committee before she joined the administration.

Russian officials have said they would not consider the Aegis system a strategic threat, and some have suggested it could be used in conjunction with Russian radar facilities.

Staff writers Mary Beth Sheridan and Perry Bacon in Washington and correspondent Philip P. Pan in Helsinki contributed to this report.

17 September 2009
Obama scrapping missile shield for Czech, Poland
By KAREL JANICEK and WILLIAM J. KOLE
The Associated Press

NATO's new chief hailed the move as "a positive step" and a Russian analyst said Obama's decision will increase the chances that Russia will cooperate more closely with the United States in the dispute over Iran's nuclear program.

Premier Jan Fischer told reporters that Obama phoned him overnight to say that "his government is pulling out of plans to build a missile defense radar on Czech territory."

"The same happened with Poland. Poland was informed in the same way about this intention," Fischer said.

He said Obama assured him that the "strategic cooperation" between the Czech Republic and the U.S. would continue, and that Washington considers the Czechs among its closest allies.

In Poland, officials declined to confirm Fischer's remarks, saying they were waiting for a formal announcement from Washington.

The plan, proposed by the Bush administration, aimed to defend the United States and its European allies against a possible missile attack from Iran or elsewhere in the Middle East. In all, 10 interceptor rockets were to have been stationed in Poland and a radar system based in the Czech Republic.

But Russia was livid over the prospect of having U.S. interceptor rockets in countries so close to its territory, and the Obama administration has sought to improve strained ties with the Kremlin.

"The U.S. president's decision is a well-thought (out) and systematic one," said Konstantin Kosachev, head of the foreign affairs committee in the State Duma, the lower house of the Russian parliament. "It reflects understanding that any security measure can't be built entirely on the basis of one nation."

"Now we can talk about restoration of (the) strategic partnership between Russia and the United States," Kosachev added.

Alexei Arbatov, head of the Russian Academy of Science's Center for International Security, told a Moscow radio station on Thursday that the U.S. was giving in on missile defense to get more cooperation from Russia on Iran.

"The United States is reckoning that by rejecting the missile-defense system or putting it off to the far future, Russia will be inclined together with the United States to take a harder line on sanctions against Iran," he said.

Czechs and Poles, along with some other Eastern Europeans, have complained of what many perceive as neglect by the Obama administration.

That, in turn, has prompted a U.S. diplomatic effort to reassure the countries that America - which helped liberate them from decades of communist-era isolation and helped bring them into NATO - still values them as friends and partners.

Fischer said after a review of the missile defense system, the U.S. now considers the threat of an attack using short- and mid-range missiles greater than one using long-range rockets.

"That's what the Americans assessed as the most serious threat," and Obama's decision was based on that, he said.

Obama took office undecided about the European system and said he would study it. His administration never sounded enthusiastic about it, and European allies have been preparing for an announcement that the White House would not complete the shield as designed.

Obama himself had hinted that the U.S. was rethinking the plan. In a major foreign policy speech in April in Prague, he said Washington would proceed with developing the system as long as Iran posed a threat to U.S. and European security.

But a top military leader, Marine Gen. James Cartwright, recently suggested that the U.S. may have underestimated how long it would take Iran to develop long-range missiles.

The Czech government had stood behind the planned radar system despite fierce opposition from the public, which staged numerous protests.

Critics feared the Czech Republic would be targeted by terrorists if it agreed to host the radar system, which was planned for the Brdy military installation 90 kilometers (55 miles) southwest of Prague, the capital.

In Washington, Defense Secretary Robert Gates scheduled a news conference Thursday with Cartwright, the point man on the technical challenge of arraying missiles and interceptors to defend against long-range missiles.

The decision to scrap the plan will have future consequences for U.S. relations with eastern Europe.

"If the administration approaches us in the future with any request, I would be strongly against it," said Jan Vidim, a lawmaker with Czech Republic's conservative Civic Democratic Party, which supported the missile defense plan.
 

17 September 2009
U.S. drops Bush plan for Europe missile shield
By Jeff Mason and Adam Entous Jeff Mason And Adam Entous
Reuters

In a move that could spur regional fears of resurgent Kremlin influence, Obama said he had approved recommendations from U.S. military leaders to shift focus to defending against Iran's short- and medium-term missiles.

"This new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack," Obama said, scrapping plans put in place by the Bush administration for ground-based interceptors in Poland and a related radar site in the Czech Republic.

Moscow said it would welcome the decision to drop former President George W. Bush's project, which had complicated U.S. efforts to enlist Russian support on Afghanistan, Iran and nuclear arms control.

But critics accused the White House of dangerous weakness. Bush's plans had raised hopes of huge contracts among U.S. defense giants.

Senator John McCain, the Republican presidential candidate who lost to Obama in 2008, blasted the move as "seriously misguided" and former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations John Bolton, a leading Bush-era hawk, was scathing.

"It's just unambiguously bad decision," he said. "Russia and Iran are the big winners. I just think it's a bad day for American national security."

The Bush administration had proposed the system amid concerns Iran was trying to develop nuclear warheads it could mount on long-range missiles.

The shield was intended as a fixed installation to defend against long-range missile launches from "rogue" states. But Russia saw it as a threat to its missile defenses and overall security.

THE NEW APPROACH

Outlining the new approach, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said on Thursday the United States would deploy Aegis ships with interceptors capable of blowing up ballistic missiles above the atmosphere to defend both European allies and U.S. forces against any threats.

Gates said land-based defense systems would be fielded in a second phase starting in about 2015.

"We have now the opportunity to deploy new sensors and interceptors in northern and southern Europe that near term can provide missile defense coverage against more immediate threats from Iran or others," he said.

"Those who say we are scrapping missile defense in Europe are either misinformed or misrepresenting the reality of what we are doing," Gates said.

Marine Corps General James Cartwright, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the Pentagon also envisioned eventually deploying a land-based radar as part of the system which would ideally be based in the Caucasus.

Shares of U.S. companies involved in missile defense, including Boeing Co, Lockheed Martin Corp, Northrop Grumman Corp and Raytheon Co, were little changed in early trade on the New York Stock Exchange.

The decision had been widely anticipated, with the contractors also likely to benefit from the administration's revised missile-defense plans.

"NOT ABOUT RUSSIA"

The White House rejected Republican charges it had made a major concession to Moscow without winning anything in return. "This is not about Russia," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said, adding there was no quid pro quo expected.

But other Democrats said they hoped for a pay-off on Iran policy where Russia is seen as a reluctant partner in international efforts to end Tehran's nuclear program.

"It is time for Russia to join our push to impose stricter sanctions on Iran," Democratic Senator Charles Schumer said in a statement

Republicans -- who hope to build momentum against Obama after a summer dominated by angry debate over his healthcare reform plan -- wasted no time assigning blame.

"The reported decision to scrap missile defense for Europe sounds dangerously like a policy of appeasement," Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, the ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said in a statement.

Riki Ellison, a prominent U.S. missile-defense advocate, said the move was driven by political considerations rather than new intelligence about Iran's capabilities, which he called inaccurate.

"I think this administration believes that security in Europe involves a positive relationship with Russia and this is something they were willing to give to Russia to create that re-enhanced relationship," he said.

Such fears were likely to grow in eastern Europe states, many of which had seen the large missile plan as a symbol of U.S. commitment to the defense against any encroachment by its former Soviet rulers 20 years after the end of communist rule.

Obama informed the Czech and Polish governments of his decision just hours before the announcement, officials said.

Some European analysts said the U.S. move could help the traditionally pro-American region to build a more pragmatic relationship with both Washington and Moscow.

But there was also concern it could embolden Russian hardliners. Ignoring U.S. assurances that the system was not targeted at Moscow, President Dmitry Medvedev had threatened last year to station missiles in a Russian enclave near Poland if the United States implemented the plan.

A senior Iranian government source said the move could signal a move away from what he called 'threats and confrontation' over Iran's nuclear program.

(Additional reporting by Jan Lopatka in Prague, Conor Sweeney in Moscow, Jim Wolf and Adam Entous in Washington and Ross Colvin in Baghdad, Tim Hepher; Writing by Andrew Quinn; Editing by Patricia Wilson and Jackie Frank)

17 September 2009
East Europe: Rancor, relief on missile shield plan
By Karel Janicek and William J. Kole
Associated Press