An easy scenario to envision after 9/11 is where terrorists come into possession of a foreign missile silo with nuclear tipped missiles. They decide to launch them at a target. Millions die. The return address is not valid, however, and retaliation is not an option.

There is currently ten other countries that are nuclear-capable. Within five years, at least three more will likely be---Iran, Syria, and North Korea. The biggest problem is Russia—current owners of ‘nukes’.

In February, the word-war started between the US and Russia over US Ballistic Missile Defense(BMD) in Central Europe. Apparently, the real bone of contention is the US plans for allowing Poland missile-defense deployment and radar sites in the Czech Republic, as a missile shield.

Earlier, Condoleezza Rice(Secretary of State) and Robert Gates(Defense Secretary) had made the suggestion to Putin that Russia join NATO and the US as a full partner in the BMD system. But Putin would have none of it.

But one has to wonder why meetings between Putin and Ahmadinejad(Iran) had Putin saying “Iran and Russia are now cooperating on a wide range of issues such as aviation history, and Russia will continue its contribution its contribution to Iran’s peaceful nuclear program.”

Oliver North(Townhall) reported that the Russian-built Bushehr light water nuclear reactor(in Iran) is quite capable of producing weapons-grade plutonium. He also says that the same news reports ignored the collection of gas centrifuges Iran is using to assure a two-pronged approach--one is producing nuclear weapons. And why has Putin recently sold anti-aircraft weapons to Iran to defend its(possible) nuclear sites?

When recently in Germany, Putin told reporters(meant for any intended military response to Iran), “Threatening someone, in this case the Iranian leadership and the Iranian people, will lead nowhere. They are not afraid, believe me.” A few days later at a Caspian summit, Putin reiterated to the world that Russia would block any reactions to stop Iran’s nuclear program.

Most interestingly the AP observed “…they[Missile Defense Agency] believe that in terms of raw speed, US interceptors in Poland could catch a Russian ICBM launched from western Russia at any part of the continental US.” It seems that all prior testing of US missile-defense systems have done the impossible—i.e., hitting a ‘bullet’ with a ‘bullet’. In other words, the systems have worked roughly 80% of the time. As Ed Fuelner(Heritage Foundation) says, “That would make missile defense one of the few federal programs to deliver more than it promised.”

The very pronounced Iranian missile threat is something most people can understand. But according to Dr. Matthew Gerber(Baylor/ Dept of Communications[3/4/07]), Russia’s skepticism of Bush’s BMD program centers on three separate objections: 1)abrogation of the 1972 ABM treaty, 2)BMD could erode Russia’s strategic nuclear force, and 3) the US view is an over-exaggerated threat of missile proliferation.

But close inspection reveals that the pre-existing ABM treaty ceased to exist when the USSR ceased to exist in 1991. Strangely, Moscow is now vowing to repeal the INF Treaty(Gaffney/TownHall) and attack the Poles and the Czechs should they begin their version of missile-defense.

It is also highly likely that Russia’s second-strike capability is as small as 10’s of missiles(Gerber). Even “knowing” that US missile defenses are not aimed at Russia, Putin still views BMD as a threat… “to its status as the strategic nuclear equal of the US”(Gerber). 

Russia is nowhere near being comparable to the USSR that existed in 1991, and therefore nowhere near being a strategic nuclear “equal” of the US. Population-wise, Russia is on schedule to be smaller than Yemen’s population by the mid-21st century(Rusher/TownHall).

Russia also knows that BMD works, and that their entire nuclear arsenal could be ‘checkmated’ by the Americans. Not only that, but economic pressures would force them to slash its nuclear forces down to a number in the hundreds. And still, Putin disregards an offer to be protected by a NATO missile shield.

Why would Putin refuse possible protection? Why would he threaten to attack defensive sites in Poland and Czechoslovakia? Why does Putin refuse to admit that BMD will likely result in reduction, or elimination, of all nuclear arsenals? Why would he not realize the billions that could be saved with not building more ‘nukes’? Pride can be a terrible thing.

The US has continually told Russia that the system would defend against rogue states and terrorists—not Russia. We know that Russia today is no military threat to the US, and that Putin’s illogical reactions may come from being a former KGB officer. No doubt, Putin seems extremely resentful of American-led efforts to allegedly push into Russia’s former sphere of influence.

It is highly unlikely that, despite all of Putin’s bluster, Russia is in any position to stop BMD. Even with every country’s blunders with intelligence agencies, most are still quite aware of all others’ military capabilities. But given the close Russian-Iranian ties, in all likelihood if Russia gets pinched, then Iran will get one savage punch in the stomach.

Kevin Roeten
http://kevinroeten.us/