Skip this site's navigation and go to its main content


Receive Updates From Heritage

Receive Updates From Heritage

The Heritage Foundation
Leadership for America

Our Vision

Building an America where freedom, opportunity, prosperity, and civil society flourish.

About The Heritage Foundation

Founded in 1973, The Heritage Foundation is a research and educational institution—a think tank—whose mission is to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, limited government, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense. We believe the principles and ideas of the American Founding are worth conserving and renewing. As policy entrepreneurs, we believe the most effective solutions are consistent with those ideas and principles.


What Obama Gets for Scrapping Missile Defenses in Europe

Posted September 30th, 2009 at 9:51am in American Leadership, Protect America 2 Print This Post Print This Post

MOSCOW – The Kremlin perceives the Obama Administration’s decision to scrap the third site anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic as a radical review of the US global leadership policy and a serious concession to Russia. At the same time, the Kremlin does not think it necessary to meet Washington halfway and is confining itself to verbal promises.

Indeed, Russia in the person of President Dmitry Medvedev and a number of military commanders, announced its decision to reverse its plans to deploy Iskander missiles in the Kaliningrad Region.  In reality this is no concession to America. Russia does not have any Iskanders to station close to the Polish borders. The Kremlin’s declaration concerning their possible deployment there was more like a bluff designed to intimidate America’s East-European partners and sow a discord within NATO.

The White House expected Moscow’s most genuine reciprocity over the Iran issue, but the Kremlin’s stance remains far removed from a policy of tough deterrence and termination of Iran’s nuclear weapons program. Medvedev did  hint that more sanctions might be inevitable for Iran under certain circumstances. And later on, during a G20 summit in Pittsburgh he did describe the construction of the second uranium enrichment plant by Iran as “a source of grave concern.”

But there are no grounds to conclude that Moscow has radically revised its policies. Referring to the information about Iran’s new uranium enrichment plant, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov made a much softer statement than Medvedev and refrained from direct criticisms of Tehran.

There is every reason to assume that on returning to Moscow, Medvedev will have to adjust the pronouncements he made in the U.S. Prime Minister Vladimir Putin is the key player in the Russian national security sphere. The talks between Iran and six world powers scheduled for October 1 will show if Russia has really made headway towards the effective deterrence of Iran’s nuclear weapons program.

Thus far, it appears that Obama’s review of the U.S. national security strategy points to an amorphous liberal “cooperative security” concept that is hardly encouraging Moscow to meet Washington halfway. The Kremlin perceives scrapping missile defenses in Europe as a U.S. weakness, which solidifies its drive to continue demonstrating that not a single European security issue can be addressed without its consent or to the detriment of its interests. It is clear now that Obama’s missile-shield decision has dealt a serious blow to America’s image and credibility in Europe but has given no tangible advantages on other regional fronts.

Tags: , , , , ,

2 Responses to “What Obama Gets for Scrapping Missile Defenses in Europe”

  1. John Sims, Redmond, Wa on at said:

    This act by Obama show how sophomoric his actions and speeches are. He acts like a high school kid running for class president or glee club leader–using rose colored glasses. Unbelievable.

  2. Bill San Antonio TX on at said:

    Obama’s admin is going to find out real fast how far they will get by dealing with (shall I say that word) – liars.

    This is what happens when one deals from a position of weakness vice strength. It is always perception that will cause our foes to act. They ask themselves, “What can I get away with?”

Leave a Comment

In order to leave a comment, you must supply information for all of the required fields below (which are indicated by bold text).

Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.