----- Original Message ----- From: Rick Rozoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 10:48 AM Subject: [STOPNATO] Clinton's dangerous missile defense bluff called by Putin STOP NATO: NO PASARAN! - HTTP://WWW.STOPNATO.COM The Times of India June 7, 2000 "...the eastward expansion of NATO and the action against Yugoslavia underline the geopolitical reality that neither Germany nor France can accept Russia integrated into Europe, as this entity would marginalize both....NATO interests mandate the early collapse of Russian strategic infrastructive....Neither Beijing nor Moscow appear ready to ignore the threat to their security that such unilateralism by Washington represents, despite soothing rhetoric from NATO." NEWS ANALYSIS: Putin calls Clinton bluff on missile defence By M D Nalapat NEW DELHI: Although the Clinton administration has named the "Rogue states" of Iran, Iraq and North Korea as the reason for developing an anti-missile system that can intercept warheads before impact, the reality is that none of these countries is a direct strategic threat to the United States. While Iran and Iraq are decades away from the development of even medium-range missiles, the North Koreans lack the infrastructure to pursue their long-range missile programmes without substantial outside help. Hence Pyongyang's policy of offering to trade such development for economic assistance. The second official reason mentioned by President Clinton to justify the NMD is even less credible. It is that nuclear weapons can fall into the hands of "terrorists and organised criminal group." While there exists a slim chance that "dirty" nukes (such as those developed by Pakistan) and even tactical nuclear weapons may get into such hands, the proposed NMD is not geared to defend against such threats, but against launches of longer-range strategic weapons. The odds that any such usable system will fall into the hands of "terrorists and criminals" is virtually zero. In reality, the National Missile Defence (BMD) system favoured by the Clinton administration is designed to protect the United States against retaliatory nuclear attack by just two countries, Russia and China, it is only against them that the US $ 250 billion full costs of the NMD can be justified. With the NMD in operation, the United States could for example arm Taiwan with nuclear weapons (as it has Israel) without fear of retaliation by Beijing. In the case of Russia, despite Moscow's obsession with being accepted as a "good European" power, a fixation that began in the 1970s, the eastward expansion of NATO and the action against Yugoslavia underline the geopolitical reality that neither Germany nor France can accept Russia integrated into Europe, as this entity would marginalise both. Despite President Putin's efforts at playing the European card, this factor will ensure the exclusion of Moscow from the inner councils of the European Union, thus driving it closer to the other "outside" gear power, China. By offering to collaborate with the United States in building a joint missile defence shield, President Putin has called Clinton's bluff. As Russia is a primary target of the shield, the question of collaboration with it will not arise unless it is a one-way street where Russian technology flows to the west and not vice-versa. NATO interests mandate the early collapse of Russian strategic infrastructure, hence President Putin is unlikely to get help from western Europe to finance an upgradation in missile and weapon systems. However, by ratifying both CTBT as well as start, Putin has laid the onus for the collapse of the two-decade long architecture of arms control, on Washington. Those treaties were concluded at a time when Moscow was still a viable superpower. Today it is an economic pygmy, and the United States would like amendments to existing treaties that reflect the huge imbalance between the relative importance of the two countries. Neither Beijing nor Moscow appear ready to ignore the threat to their security that such unilateralism by Washington represents, despite soothing rhetoric from NATO. __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Photos -- now, 100 FREE prints! http://photos.yahoo.com ______________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED] ______________________________________________________________________ Start Your Own FREE Email List at http://www.listbot.com
