On April 3rd, 2008 Bush received a delightful gift from NATO: endorsement of the non-functional missile defense, which serves as the extension of Reagan's proposal to build anti-ballistic missile shield, popularly known as Star Wars. It's worth noting the stated reason for this latest military endeavor: the Bush administration claims that the anti-ballistic missile shield will protect our European allies from rogue states, such as Iran, presumably from Iranian national suicide mission of launching a nuclear attack on Europe. But as common knowledge and logic from the recent 7+ years of Bush's regime dictates, the stated reason is the least meaningful one in the real world. Hence, the official reasons stated provide a political cover for the real reasons behind this latest military initiative.
Most serious military and scientific experts as well as academics agree on one important point: the missile defense shield provides no actual defense despite the elevated rhetoric emanating from Washington. Writing for OpenDemocracy.net, Tom Sauer and David Webb, experts in international affairs and military weapons systems, say, "it is a solution that technically does not work being applied to a problem that actually does not exist", referring to the fact that missile defense system is in fact defenseless. Moreover, Iran possesses neither the weapons, nor the technology to attack Europe at the moment. They go on:
The current generation of missile interceptors is just not capable of intercepting long-range missiles. The deployment of a large number of decoy warheads in the missile can easily overwhelm the limited number of interceptors available. Some tests have succeeded in the past because the target missile carried a homing device that guided the interceptor to it; and because it was known when the target missile would be launched, in what direction and at what speed. Would a real-world enemy announce in advance when an attack will take place, with what kind of rocket and using which ballistic track - never mind have the decency to include a homing device in the warhead?
Furthermore the placement of these military installations in Poland and Czech Republic suggests that the missile defense system is aimed at Russia, not Iran. "If Iran is really the problem, then the interceptors should in principle be stationed in Turkey rather than in east-central Europe - a location that understandably causes great concern in Russia", state the authors of the article.
So what is the real reason behind these military installations? To answer this nuanced question, one needs to look no further than the implications this deal carries and the consequences that will follow.
To begin answering this question, it's helpful to start with the obvious sub-question: who profits? The answer is simple - American high-tech industry, or what Eisenhower called military-industrial complex. As is typical in any state capitalism, profits are privatized and costs are socialized. The American taxpayer will once again carry the responsibility for filling up the pockets of the managers and executives of companies responsible for "defense" - a technical term for amalgamation of private companies that couldn't conceivably exist in a truly free market system. Hence, taxpayers carry the burden of providing lifeblood for these no-bid contractors.
However, profiteering in the name of "defense" doesn't quite tell the whole story either. The placement of these military installations is consistent with deeper US geopolitical goals. According to an article written for stratfor.com, "BMD is about one thing: space", which is part of a larger goal of weaponizing space in an attempt to monopolize it and therefore control it. The article goes on to say that while these systems may be in their infancy stages in terms of technology, their installations provide an opportunity to improve them over time and therefore provide the technology necessary to achieve the larger goal of virtual military monopoly in space. As the article explains,
Poland and the Czech Republic are about to be equipped with the rudimentary technological precursor to a series of systems that are truly the technological beginnings of the full-fledged national missile defense shield Reagan once envisioned. These incremental steps — of which nascent BMD systems extending across both the Atlantic and Pacific are only an early instance — will attempt to solidify for the U.S. military the same dominance of space that it now enjoys on the planet’s blue water... And therein lies the true leap. BMD is not just about missiles; it is about the technology and sensors necessary to dominate space".
However, even that's not the end of the story. As Tom Sauer and David Webb explain, "if the US (and its European hosts) persist in installing these missile defense systems, it is likely that Russia will take further retaliatory steps", which may carry the very real possibility of igniting a new arms race and subsequently Cold War II. Interestingly, "the Polish and Czech peoples themselves are not in favor" of these military installations in their countries, but their opinions are irrelevant for their governments and Washington because public opinion on major matters, especially concerning military, is looked upon with contempt by the Washington planners.
"Democracy" is an operative term utilized to win "hearts and minds" of the people, but its functionality is the least relevant component. Look for Poland and Czech Republic to become major allies in the "war on terror" and part of what Don Rumsfeld called a "New Europe" - one which will subserviently take orders from Washington with complete disregard for public opinion.
Welcome to the future, of which there may not be much left very soon...