• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Obama's Comments to Medvedev Reveal Missile Defense Policy

    It is a fundamental trust the American people put in a President that he will do all within his power to defend them against foreign military threats. This trust is no less applicable to threats posed by ballistic missiles. President Obama, however, apparently thinks very little of his responsibility to honor this trust.

    In an unguarded comment to outgoing Russian President Dmitri Medvedev in Seoul, South Korea, on March 26, President Obama made it clear that he will exhibit more “flexibility” in accommodating Russian objections to the U.S. expanding its missile defense capabilities after he is re-elected. What President Obama was hoping was that he could fool the American people into believing that he would do his utmost to defend them against ballistic missile attack between now and the election in November. What is now clear is that whatever commitments he makes to the American people regarding ballistic missile defense in the coming months will be jettisoned in favor of commitments to the Russian government to curtail U.S. and allied missile defense capabilities following the election.

    Accordingly, it is entirely appropriate that Representative Michael Turner (R–OH), who is the chairman of the House Strategic Forces Subcommittee, demanded in a March 26 letter to the President that he provide an “urgent explanation of your comments to President Medvedev in Seoul this morning.” The level of cynicism and dishonesty demonstrated by the President in this comment is breathtaking.

    Those already familiar with President Obama’s past interactions with the Russians on the subject of missile defense, however, may be angry and disappointed regarding his exchange—but they should not be surprised by its substance.

    President Obama has been willing to subordinate the missile defense program to his policies for arms control and nuclear disarmament for a long time. One need go no further than to read a portion of the preamble to the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), which is the new strategic nuclear arms control treaty with Russia, on the subject of missile defense. It states that U.S. missile defense capabilities must come down as the numbers of strategic nuclear weapons come down under the treaty.

    The Obama Administration spared no effort to defeat an amendment in Senate to strike this language in the New START preamble. The President’s comments in Seoul are completely in keeping with this past behavior. What is now evident is the scope of the manipulation he is pursuing to fool the American people about something essential to their security. It is now undeniable that President Obama is breaking the most basic trust the American people put in any President.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    17 Responses to Obama's Comments to Medvedev Reveal Missile Defense Policy

    1. Fed Up! says:

      Good grief! Obama! Why don't you just completely disarm our country and disband our entire military while you're at it!

    2. Marsha says:

      Don't be so sure, Mr. President, Don't be so sure!

    3. Chris Fontenot says:

      Let's not re-elect Obama. His current term was given to him by citizens who agreed with him when he said during his campaign, that we "should not reward CEOs for bad business decisions by bailing them out with taxpayer funds". He also campaigned with his promise to NOT increase the war spending in Iraq & Afghanistan, and to bring troops home ASAP.

      These two points were in direct conflict with Bush's intentions at the time. McCain failed to recognize how critical these issues were to Americans. Obama followed through with Bush's wishes after elected, and has blamed Bush ever since.

    4. Ben Tilley says:

      Ok. Who's surprised?

    5. gladys difazio says:

      THIS is no surprize to the true American people..,every promised 'lie', is always topped with another lie to cover the first lie..so, who in their right mind,would believe bo can keep his promise in the future,??? time to turn the tables on his promises, and promise to put him out of office before the election… we want a true AMERICAN to build up our country as it should be.!!!!!!!!!!!!

    6. Elad says:

      If Obamao was a christian as he professes, then his reading of the Bible would tell him he would not take that stance or any position that weakens our defense systems.

    7. Chris Upner says:

      This is absolutely absurd.

    8. Tony G says:

      We already new this once his hid his college thesis on Nuclear disarmament.

    9. gerald says:

      What a joker

    10. Nineteen84 says:

      BHO not only wants a one class society he wants a one class world – all at our expense.

    11. @Parrtweets says:

      Paying attention?

    12. Ellen says:

      Obama has to go while we still have our country.If he gets re-elected our beloved country will no longer be a republic.

    13. EdS says:

      I'm disgusted by his boldness and utter audacity!

    14. trs says:

      this is absurb to say the least…go ahead and let any nation have our secrets…Obama must go or we are headed towards utter destruction…We cannot stand-by and say this is ok..wake up America and can this clown and whoever supports his socialist regime !!!!

    15. David says:

      so i'm the only Obama critic who is also in favour of nuclear disarmament.

      let me start by saying this simple fact. the number of thermonuclear blasts it would take to make the entire surface of our planet unliveable: 3

      the number of thermonuclear warheads in existence today: thousands.

      do the math people, and don't be blinded by your Obama-hate. Nukes are bad and have to go, if we want to lead the world, we have to take the lead on important issues

      I may not like Obama, but anytime there is one less nuke on earth, we are slightly more safe.

      • Dinah 46 says:

        The issue here does not necessarily have anything to do with nuclear weapons. The issue is missile defense which in most cases involve standard armaments. A good missile defense system, carefully deployed on land and water, could mean nuclear weapons need never be considered.

    16. Sue says:

      Psalm 107
      21 Hear this, you foolish and senseless people,
      who have eyes but do not see,
      who have ears but do not hear:

      23 But these people have stubborn and rebellious hearts;
      they have turned aside and gone away.

      24 They do not say to themselves,
      'Let us fear the LORD our God,
      who gives autumn and spring rains in season,
      who assures us of the regular weeks of harvest.'

      25 Your wrongdoings have kept these away;
      your sins have deprived you of good.

      26 "Among my people are wicked men
      who lie in wait like men who snare birds
      and like those who set traps to catch men.

      27 Like cages full of birds,
      their houses are full of deceit;
      they have become rich and powerful

      28 and have grown fat and sleek.
      Their evil deeds have no limit;
      they do not plead the case of the fatherless to win it,
      they do not defend the rights of the poor.

    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.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×