Text Fwd: Here We Go Again - Missile Offense Center for Czech Republic

* Image source: Bruce Gagnon blog on July 30, 2010

* Text sent from Bruce Gagnon on July 30, 2010

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j2DquDyjJGH2kx1e7w787oIn21ZwD9H9CAHO0


Associated Press
July 30, 2010

US wants missile defense center in Czech Republic
By KAREL JANICEK


PRAGUE: The Czech prime minister said Friday his government has been negotiating a plan with the United States to place a warning center in the Czech Republic as part of a reworked U.S. missile defense plan.

Petr Necas said the purpose of the center was to gather and analyze information from satellite censors "to detect missiles aiming at NATO territory."

"It's not supposed to be a huge military installation," Necas said.

He said only several people will be needed to run the center, and that they could be from the U.S., NATO member countries or the Czechs after undergoing training.

It is not clear yet where in the country the installation could be based or when it could become operational. Necas said Prague was an option.

The U.S. plans to initially invest $2 million in 2011 and 2012 for the center, which is expected to become part of a joint NATO missile defense shield in the future, Necas said.

In September, the Obama administration scrapped Bush-era blueprints for basing long-range interceptors in Poland and a radar system in the Czech Republic as part of a missile defense shield designed to shoot down long-range missiles from countries including Iran.

It was strongly opposed by Russia and unpopular among the Czech public.

The new system is focused on short- and medium-range interceptors.

U.S. Vice President Joe Biden won agreement from the Czech Republic and Poland to join Obama's reconfigured missile defense during his October visit to Prague and Warsaw.

To build the center, no new Czech-U.S. deal or parliamentary approval will be needed, Necas said.

His government may support the new U.S. plan but opponents say they were ready to protest again.

"It's too serious to be silent," said Jan Tamas who organized numerous protest rallies against the radar base proposed by the Bush administration.
===========================
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

Text Fwd: Russia Baffled by U.S. Deployment of Patriot Missiles in Poland

* Text informed by Bruce Gagnon on May 28, 2010

Business Week
Russia Baffled by U.S. Deployment of Patriot Missiles in Poland
May 26, 2010

By Ilya Arkhipov

May 26 (Bloomberg) -- Russia “doesn’t understand the logic” of a U.S. decision to deploy a Patriot air-defense missile battery in Poland near the Russian border, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said.

“Such military activity doesn’t help to bolster our common security, the development of relations or predictability in the region,” the spokesman said by telephone in Moscow today, declining to be identified in line with ministry policy.

The U.S. missiles and their crews arrived in Poland on May 23 for the first stage of a rotating, two-year deployment. The battery will be located in Morag, about 70 kilometers (44 miles) from the border with Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave, for training with Polish troops, according to the U.S. Embassy.

Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said hours after the election of his U.S. counterpart, Barack Obama, that he’d deploy short-range Iskander missiles in Kaliningrad if the U.S. went ahead with plans for a missile shield in Europe. In September 2009, Obama said he was scrapping the missile-system proposal, championed by his predecessor George W. Bush.

As Medvedev prepares for a state visit to the U.S., the Patriot deployment “doesn’t fit into the overall fabric of our relations at this stage,” the Foreign Ministry spokesman said.

“It’s not clear why they need this,” the spokesman said. “This is an anti-aircraft system. There’s an element of anti- missile defense, but not very big.”

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

Text Fwd: Rasmussen In Poland: Expeditionary NATO, Missile Shield And Nuclear Weapons

* Rick Rozoff sent on March 14, 2010

Rasmussen In Poland: Expeditionary NATO, Missile Shield And Nuclear Weapons
Rick Rozoff
March 14, 2010

The civilian chief of the world’s only, and history’s first self-proclaimed global, military bloc is having a busy month.

North Atlantic Treaty Organization Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen delivered an address in Washington, DC on February 23 on the military alliance’s new 21st century Strategic Concept along with U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, her predecessor twice-removed Madeleine Albright and National Security Adviser James Jones, the last-named a former Marine Corps general and NATO Supreme Allied Commander. [1]

At the seminar and on the preceding evening at Georgetown University in what is arguably NATO’s true capital, Rasmussen sounded familiar themes: Highlighting the need to prevail in Afghanistan, NATO’s first ground war and first armed conflict outside of Europe. Applauding the work of the bloc’s new cyber warfare center in Estonia, ostensibly to protect the comparatively new member state against attacks emanating from Russia. Identifying Iran and North Korea for particular scrutiny.

He also spoke of “deepening our partnerships with countries from across the globe” and affirmed “NATO is a permanent Alliance….” [2]

The bloc’s chief announced the creation of “a new division at NATO Headquarters to deal with new threats and challenges.” [3]

Since then Rasmussen has visited Jordan, Bahrain, Finland, the Czech Republic and Poland to promote the broadening of worldwide military partnerships, the recruitment of more troops and other support for the Afghan war, and the expansion of an eventual global missile shield system within the context of NATO’s further transformation into an international and expeditionary security and military force. In Rasmussen’s words, the Alliance is to become a global security forum in addition to being the world’s only permanent military alliance.

The Strategic Concept meeting held in Finland on March 4 with the foreign ministers of that country and of Sweden, Alexander Stubb and Carl Bildt, respectively, as well as Finland’s defense minister – the first formal gathering on the Strategic Concept held in a non-member nation – focused on the two Scandinavian nations’ expanding role in Afghanistan and what was described as EU-NATO cooperation and Nordic cooperation.

Regarding supposed threats which within the current context could only be an allusion to Finland’s neighbor Russia, Rasmussen said that it was no longer sufficient to “line up soldiers and tanks and military equipment along the borders.” Instead the bloc’s members “really have to address the threat at its roots, and it might be in cyber space,” as the “enemy might appear everywhere in cyberspace.” [4]

FOR MORE READING, CLICK HERE

Text Fwd: The Missile Shield Deadlock between the US and Russia

* Image source: same as the link
'US President Barack Obama has a vision of a world without nuclear weapons. But disarmament talks
with Russian President Dimitry Medvedev are proving difficult.'

* Text sent from Bruce Gagnon on March 10, 2010.

Spiegel Online
03/10/2010 10:54 AM
Nuclear Disarmament
The Missile Shield Deadlock between the US and Russia

By Christian Neef

The US and Russia are currently negotiating a successor to the START nuclear disarmament treaty. But continued American plans for a missile shield in Europe have proven to be a major stumbling block. President Obama's vision of a nuclear-free world is in danger.

There is good news on the disarmament front: US President Barack Obama is fine-tuning a new nuclear strategy. As White House officials said last week during a meeting between Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates, he plans to reach a decision by April. The new strategy could include the scrapping of "thousands of nuclear weapons," and even a commitment by the United States not to develop any new nuclear weapons.

In addition, what may be the final round of Russian-American talks on the further reduction of strategic offensive weapons started on Tuesday in Geneva. The successor for the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) is "almost 100 percent complete," says a Moscow negotiator. "We have agreed on the number of launch systems and the warheads, as well as the inspection and destruction of the nuclear payloads. All problems have been solved."

So much optimism has rarely been seen in Moscow and Washington, particularly when it comes to the two countries' arsenals of nuclear weapons.

Unfortunately, though, the elation is not genuine. The idea that the world can become a planet free of nuclear weapons one day -- as promised by Obama in his visionary speech last year in Prague -- remains a fallacy for the time being.

And the new treaty won't change that. Even if Russia and the US finally put aside their decades of hostility during the Cold War and sign a treaty outlining the further reduction of their nuclear arsenals, their behind-the-scenes relationship is, once again, characterized by deep mistrust -- perhaps even more so than during the administration of the abrasive former US president, George W. Bush.

Honorable Intentions

The Russians, in particular, feel that they are once again being misled. They may believe that man now in the Oval Office has honorable intentions, but they do not believe he is capable of reversing his country's position on nuclear weapons, says Dmitri Trenin, head of the Moscow Carnegie Center. According to Trenin, the biggest anti-Russia skeptics have retained key posts in Obama's administration. For the Russians, this is clearly reflected in Washington's plans to develop new missile defense systems around the world.

The plan was presented on Feb. 1 -- only a few months after the US had decided not to install a comparable system in Poland and the Czech Republic.

Now the United States wants to develop a missile defense system to protect European members of NATO. There are to be four stages, with a scheduled completion date of 2020. At first, SM-3 missiles, which are designed to intercept incoming ballistic missiles outside the earth's atmosphere, will be stationed on ships in the Mediterranean. In a second phase, ground-launched missiles with corresponding radar systems will be installed in southeastern European countries. After that, similar systems will be installed in northern Europe, followed by intercept devices designed, in particular, to destroy intercontinental ballistic missiles coming from the Middle East and targeting the United States.

The document remains vague and does not specify the countries in which the systems would be based. But it was already revealed earlier that Romania had agreed to accept American SM-3 missiles, and neighboring Bulgaria is also open to such plans. "We have to demonstrate solidarity," said Bulgarian Prime Minister Boiko Borisov, by way of justification.

'New Weapons System'

"They have jettisoned Poland and the Czech Republic, which they portray as a major concession," says Dmitry Rogozin, Moscow's ambassador to NATO in Brussels. "But this plan presents us with even greater challenges. Our military will react with a new weapons system."

This doesn't sound like disarmament. But why should Russia be concerned about a defense system officially aimed at missiles from rogue states like Iran and North Korea?

First, because there is an imbalance between the Russians and the Americans in the development of their respective strategic armed forces. Moscow is still focusing on the expansion and renewal of its offensive weapons. Washington, on the other hand, is no longer developing any new nuclear offensive systems, instead concentrating on expanding the missile shield.

Under the rules of the START treaty, which expired last December, the Russians were required to routinely furnish Washington with technical data on new missile tests. As a result, the Americans are relatively well informed about Moscow's missile capabilities. But nowhere was it stipulated that either party had to provide the other side with details on the development of a missile defense system. The Russian military, therefore, knows next to nothing about its rival's capabilities.

Nothing Has Happened

"It is clear to us that missile defense is an extremely sensitive issue in Russian-American relations," concedes John Beyrle, Washington's ambassador in Moscow. Indeed, in recognition of that sensitivity, Obama and his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev agreed last year that Russians and Americans would conduct a joint analysis on which world regions are potentially threatened by missiles from a rogue state and, therefore, where the development of missile defense would make sense.

But nothing has happened -- Washington appears to be dragging its feet. "There is nothing but stubborn silence on the other side," Russian NATO Ambassador Rogozin told SPIEGEL. "The Americans are avoiding dialogue." Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said angrily that he instructed the Russian ambassador in Washington to find out "how to interpret all of this, and what is behind the Romanian and the Bulgarian surprise."

The Kremlin -- and this is the second reason behind Russia's agitation -- doesn't believe Washington's claim that the planned defensive missiles on Russia's western flank would only serve as a protection against Iran. "This is where the White House's age-old plan to suffocate our strategic armed forces and destroy our own intercontinental missiles, directly after START, is being implemented," say military experts in Moscow. They insist that Russia is being surrounded by an "anti-missile fence" that will provide the Americans with one-sided superiority.

Moscow sees its nuclear second-strike capability threatened, and it believes that it would hardly be able to react in the event of an attack. This would render its nuclear deterrent capability worthless -- yet another humiliation for the major power in the East.

Vanishing Balance

The problem of American missile defense has to be closely tied to that of Russian offensive weapons, Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said in a recent speech in the Pacific coastal city of Vladivostok. If Russia did nothing to oppose the missile defense system, he added, the other side would "feel completely safe under its missile shield, and it would do as it pleased. The balance would be gone, and aggression in politics and business would grow abruptly." Putin's conclusion is that "Russia needs new offensive systems."

This is no easy task for Moscow's military leaders. Russian NATO Ambassador Rogozin fears that the American missile ships "operating in the Mediterranean and the Arctic Ocean in the future will be more difficult to pursue and hard to pinpoint."

Russia's presumed counter-weapon is called "Jars," and military leaders in Moscow have already announced its deployment. It could be a further development of the Topol-M ICBM (known as the SS-27 in NATO code), with which Moscow is now furnishing its strategic armed forces. Unlike the Topol, which only contains a nuclear payload, the Jars can release up to 10 warheads, which can head for different targets independently of each other. This makes it more difficult to destroy them. But why Russia declared the Jars as its new miracle weapon some time ago remains a mystery. Was the more recent upgrade planned for much earlier? Does it have anything at all to do with the US plans?

It is doubtful, however, that the Kremlin is spending enough money to bring its already deficient missile units up to date. Indeed, it is partly for this reason that Russia places great stock in diplomacy -- and in the new arms reduction treaty.

Although the details have already been worked out, the treaty is still not ready to be signed. The Kremlin wants it to include a ban on the further expansion of missile defense.

Russia in NATO?

The Russian parliament is threatening to not ratify the treaty if the US refuses to agree to such a ban. Should that happen, the carefully conceived plan of radical disarmament would be discarded before it even gained momentum -- and the next crisis of confidence between the world's leading nuclear powers will have begun.

Given such circumstances, the proposal by former German Defense Minister Volker Rühe and three other military and political leaders comes at an opportune time. According to Rühe, the basis for the Russians' feeling of being threatened by the West should be eliminated once and for all. The only solution, he says, is to bring Moscow into NATO. For Rühe, trust can only be established if Americans and Europeans finally put their cards on the table when dealing with the Russians.

Rühe's appeal sounds surprising, and yet it makes sense from a European perspective. There is only one hitch: Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov has always dismissed the notion of a Russian NATO membership as a "fantasy." He also doesn't believe that Washington would go along with the idea. However, Moscow's position doesn't have to be written in stone.

Madeleine Albright, secretary of state under former President Bill Clinton and currently involved in the development of a new NATO strategic concept, has only nurtured Lavrov's skepticism. Washington, she says, will never allow Russia to influence NATO strategy: "We will not allow the tail to wag the dog."

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
globalnet@mindspring.com
www.space4peace.org
http://space4peace.blogspot.com/ (blog)

Text Fwd: US 'missile defence' move criticised by CND

* Sent by Bruce Gagnon on Feb. 4, 2010

Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

press office: 07968 420859
switchboard: 020 7700 2393
e-mail: pressoffice@cnduk.org
web: www.cnduk.org


Press Release
Thursday 4th February

Attn: News Desks / Political / Europe / Defence Correspondents


US 'missile defence' move criticised by CND

The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament regrets moves towards the establishment of a US interceptor missile base in Romania, announced only days after plans emerged to site Patriot batteries in four Gulf states. CND criticised the move as part of a deepening entrenchment of US forces in the region.

Kate Hudson, Chair of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, said "President Obama's reconfiguration of plans for the Czech Republic and Poland allowed the 'reset' of relations with Russia. But deploying an ever-greater number of military systems across eastern Europe does nothing to help the US and Russia conclude a successor to the START disarmament treaty. Nor does it help make Europe safer. The suggestion that Aegis missile defence ships may patrol the Baltic and the Black Sea and that a Ukrainian radar may be used in the system, means there is a real risk that the thawing of US-Russian relations will be sent off-course. The US move to make permanent a temporary military base in Romania - and continued efforts to expand NATO - all serve to push Europe towards more military spending when it is completely unnecessary and we can ill afford it."

- ends –

1. For further information and interviews please contact Ben Soffa, CND's Press Officer, on 0207 7002350 or 07968 420859

2. The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) is one of Europe's biggest single-issue peace campaigns, with over 35,000 members in the UK. CND campaigns for the abolition of all nuclear weapons everywhere. www.cnduk.org

Text Fwd: Russia will not just watch Patriot missiles deployed

* Image source: same as the below link

Bruce Gagnon sent on Jan. 31
The news Pl
Russia will not just watch Patriot missiles deployed
29.01.2010 15:13

Russia's ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin, warned on Friday that his country will not passively watch the deployment of a U.S. Patriot missile battery in Poland.

The US will supply the Patriots and 100 troops in Poland this year, to be stationed not far from the Russian Kaliningrad border.

"Do they really think that we will calmly watch the location of a rocket system, at a distance of 60 km from Kaliningrad?", the Russian diplomat said Friday.

Rogozin refused to clarify what the response of the Russian side would be to the deployment. "It is a matter for the military," is all he would say.

According to the ambassador, the decision to deploy Patriots in Poland is "reckless".

Rogozin said that Moscow is consulting with Warsaw and Washington on the matter, using both diplomatic and military channels. "We hope that the decision will be reviewed," he stressed.

Last Friday Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that he did not understand the plan to deploy Patriot missiles in Poland. “Why create the impression that Poland is strengthened [its defences] against Russia?"

Earlier, a Russian Navy spokesperson announced that Russia’s Baltic Fleet would be strengthened although this was not confirmed by the Kremlin. (pg)



Source: PAP

[국문 번역] U.S. to test missile shield vs. Iran-style strike 미국 미사일 실험 대이란 스타일 공격

*Image source: same as the below link

* Source: Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space

U.S. to test missile shield vs. Iran-style strike
미국 미사일 실험 대이란 스타일 공격
By Phil Stewart and Jim Wolf
필스튜어트와 짐 울프
14 December 2009 2009 년 12월 14일
Reuters
로이터

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States will test its core missile defenses for the first time in January against a simulated long-range Iranian attack, a top Pentagon official said on Monday, amid tensions with Tehran.

워싱턴(로이터)- 테헤란과의 긴장이 진행되는 와중, 미국은 처음으로 이란의 가상 장거리 [미사일 발사] 공격에 맞서 [2010년] 1월, 자신의 핵심 미사일 방어 실험을 할것이라고 미 국방부의 수석 관리가 말했다.

Speaking at the Reuters Aerospace and Defense Summit in Washington, Army Lieutenant General Patrick O'Reilly, the head of the Missile Defense Agency, said the roughly $150 million test was a departure from the more standard scenario of a North Korean attack.

워싱턴의 우주 항공 및 방어 정상 회담에서 미사일 방어국 수장인 육군 중장 패트릭 오레일리는 로이터에게 약 1억 5천만 달러 ($150 million )가 나가는 이 실험은 더 기준적인 시나리오인 북한에 대항하는 것으로부터의 이탈 (departure) 이라 말했다.

It also would be more difficult testing the U.S. Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD) system against a missile that would be faster and more direct as it races toward the United States than a simulated strike from North Korea.

이것은 미국 지대 중거리 방어 (Ground-based Midcourse Defense (GMD)) 시스템의 더 어려운 실험으로 미국으로 향할 때 북한으로 부터 오는 가상 공격보다 더 빠르고 더 직접적인 미사일에 대항하는 것이 될 것이다.

"Previously, we have been testing the GMD system against a North Korean-type scenario," O'Reilly said.

“이전에 우리는, 북한 타입의 시나리오에 맞서 지대 중거리 방어 실험을 해왔었다,” 오레일리는 말했다.

"This next test ... is more of a head-on shot like you would use defending against an Iranian shot into the United States. So that's the first time that we're now testing in a different scenario."

“ 이 다음 실험은.. 더 첫 머리에 맞추는 것과 같은데 미국으로 진입하는 이란의 공격시 방어로 사용하게 될 것이다, 그러므로 이것은 다른 시나리오에서 우리가 실험하는 첫번째 것이 될 것이다.

His comments came the same day that diplomats disclosed concerns among intelligence agencies that Iran tested a key atomic bomb component as recently as 2007. The finding, if proven true, would clash with Iran's assertion that its nuclear work is for civilian use.

그의 언급은 이란이 최근 2007년도에 핵심 핵 폭탄 요소들을 실험했다는 정보 기관들의 우려를 외교관들이 공개한 것과 같은 날에 나왔다. 알려진 것이 사실이라면 핵 작업이 민간용이라는 이란의 주장과 충돌할 것이다.

The test would fire an interceptor missile from Vandenberg Air Force Base in California at a simulated incoming missile, launched from the Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean. An aide to O'Reilly estimated the cost at about $150 million.

그 실험은 태평양 마샬 군도에서 날아오는 가상 진입 미사일에 캘리포니아 공군 기지로부터 요격 미사일을 발사하는 것이다. 오레일리의 보좌관은 그 가격을 약 1억 5천만 달러로 산정했다.

Experts compare the simulation to a bullet hitting another bullet in space. O'Reilly said the goal was to destroy the target over the north central Pacific when the missiles had a combined closing speed of more than 17,000 miles per hour.

전문가들은 그 가상 [실험]을 우주에서 총알 하나로 다른 총알을 맞추는 것에 비교한다. 오레일리는 그 목표가 미사일들이 시간당 1만 7천 마일 이상의 합친 종료 속도를 지닐 때 북 중앙 태평양 위로 날아오는 목표물을 파괴하는 것이라고 말했다.

"Whenever we have a situation where we're taking on a missile more head on than from the side, that increases the challenges," O'Reilly said.

“우리가 옆으로 나는 것보다 더 머리로 날아 오는 미사일에 맞서는 상황을 맞을 때마다 도전은 더 증가한다.”라고 오레일리는 말했다.

RUSSIA, JAPAN 러시아, 일본

U.S. President Barack Obama revamped the U.S. missile defense strategy for Europe in September to focus more on Iranian short- and medium-range missiles.

미국 대통령 바락 오바마 는 [2009년] 9월에 이란 단, 중거리 미사일에 맞서기 위해 유럽에 대한 미국 미사일 방어전략을 재편했다.

"The development of that (Iranian) long-range threat has been slower than what was originally estimated, and the pace of the medium-range missiles is dramatically higher," he said.

“ (이란) 장거리 위협의 개발은 원래 생각햇던 것보다 더뎠고 중거리 미사일의 보조는 극적으로 높다.”라고 그는 말했다.

Obama's revamp may clear the way for collaboration with Russia, which had fiercely opposed a Bush-era plan to put ground-based interceptors in Poland and a related radar system in the Czech Republic.

오바마의재편은 러시아와의 결합을 더 분명하게 할 것인데 러시아는 폴란드에 지대 요격 미사일과 체코에 관계된 레이다 시스템을 놓는 부쉬 시대의 계획에 맹렬하게 반대한 바 있다.

O'Reilly said Washington and Moscow were in regular contact to exchange ideas on possible collaboration.

오레일리는 워싱턴과 모스크바가 가능한 결합에 대해 생각을 나누기 위해 정기적으로 접촉하고 있다고 말했다.

"We've proposed a large number of ideas, starting with sharing data from their sensors and our sensors, moving all the way to cooperative development, cooperative testing and so forth," he said.

“우리는 그들 센서와 우리 센서의 데이타를 교환하는 겻부터 시작해서 협조적 개발, 실험 등등 많은 생각들을 제안해 왔다.”라고 그는 말했다.

"So they have expressed an interest, and shown it through subsequent technical working group meetings."

“그래서 그들은 관심을 표현했고 그 이후의 기술 작업 모임 회의를 통해 그 것을 보여 줬다. “

Turning to Japan, O'Reilly said that the new Japanese government had reaffirmed its commitment, in talks with him last month in Tokyo, to develop the next generation of SM-3 interceptors.

일본으로 화제를 돌리며 오레일리는 새 일본 정부가 토쿄에서 자신과의 대화에서 차세대 SM-3 요격기를 개발하기 위한 일본의 사명감을 재확인시켰다 말했다.

Boeing Co is the prime contractor for the GMD and Raytheon is the prime contractor for the SM-3.

보잉 회사는 지대 중거리 미사일의 주요 계약 업체이며 레이시온은 SM-3 의 주요 계약 업자이다.

"I just recently returned from a joint review with the Japanese. We are committed to that program and they have expressed that they remained committed," he said.

“나는 일본과의 공동 심의에서 최근 돌아왔다. 우리는 그 프로그램에 사명감을 갖고 있으며 그들은 그들이 그 사명감을 가진 채로 남아 있다”고 그는 말했다.

He said the new SM-3 missile would be about twice the weight and twice the range of the previous generation.

그는 그 새로운 SM-3 미사일이 이 전 세대보다 무게이 있어 2배이며 2배 이상의 거리를 지니고 있다 말했다.

"And there are obviously opportunities for follow-on. But right now we agreed we are focused on the development to ensure that is successful first," he said.

“그리고 실천할 분명한 기회들이 있다. 그러나 우리는 현재 그 것이 무엇보다 성공적인 것을 보증하도록 개발에 집중할 것에 동의했다” 라고 그는 말했다.

(안드레아 샬랄-에사에 의한 추가 보고; 에릭 비치에 의한 편집) (Additional reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa; Editing by Eric Beech)

____________________________________________________________________

* Source: Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space
27 January 2010 2010년 1월 27일
Missile-defense test scheduled for VAFB
밴던버그 미사일 -방어 실험 일정이 다시 짜여지다.
By Janene Scully, Associate Editor 지닌 스컬리, 편집자
Lompo Record 롬포 레코드

"The Ground-based Midcourse Defense system’s last intercept test occurred in December 2008, when the target launched from Kodiak, Alaska, was successfully hit by a Vandenberg interceptor. At the time, MDA officials called it the 37th successful hit-to-kill intercept out of 47 attempts against missiles of all ranges since 2001.

지대 중거리 방어 시스템의 마지막 요격 실험은 알라스카 코디악에서 발사된 목표물이 밴던버그 요격 미사일에 의해 성공적으로 명중된 2008년 12월 일었다. 그 때 미사일 방어국의 관리들은 그것을 2001년 이후 모든 거리의 미사일에 대항하는 47개의 시도중 37번째 성공적인 죽이기 위해 부딪치는 (hit-to-kill) 요격으로 불렀다.

Operational interceptors currently are deployed at Vandenberg and Fort Greely, Alaska."

작전 요격은 현재 밴던버그와 알라스카 포트 그릴리에 배치되어 있다.

For the full article, see, Global Network against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space

Text Fwd: Georgian Foreign Minister: “US, Czech Republic, Japan and Baltic states will become GUAM partners soon”

* StopNATO
Georgian Foreign Minister: “US, Czech Republic, Japan and Baltic states will become GUAM partners soon”
[ 09 Nov 2009 19:57 ]
Azeri Press Agency
November 10, 2009

Tbilisi. Nizami Mammadzadeh – APA. “Some countries use to say that GUAM would be dissolved soon. But our organization extended, developed. Our regional relations and democracy continue to exist”, Georgian Foreign Minister Grigol Vashadze said, APA’s Georgia bureau reports. He said GUAM feels well.
“We have already started implementing concrete projects. In New York together with my Azerbaijani counterpart Elmar Mammadyarov and other ministers we reached interesting and all-round agreements on tourism, agriculture, automobile transport and tourism. Our relations are extending, new partners appear. US, Czech Republic, Japan and Baltic states will become GUAM partners soon, they will participate in the economic projects with us,” he said.

Text Fwd: U.S. Missile Shield System Deployments: Larger, Sooner, Broader

Rick Rozoff
U.S. Missile Shield System Deployments: Larger, Sooner, Broader
Stop NATO
September 27, 2009

Synchronized announcements on September 17 by President Barack Obama and Defense Secretary Robert Gates that the U.S. was abandoning plans to station interceptor missiles in Poland and a forward-based missile radar site in the Czech Republic are now ten days ago and information surfacing in the interim indicates that its new plans are more far-reaching than their predecessor.

Two days after the statements by the American president and defense chief the latter, Pentagon head Robert Gates, was granted a column in the New York Times.

The most representative segment of Gates’ comments is arguably this:

“I have been a strong supporter of missile defense ever since President Ronald Reagan first proposed it in 1983. But I want to have real capacity as soon as possible, and to take maximum advantage of new technologies….American missile defense on the continent will continue, and not just in Central Europe, the most likely location for future SM-3 sites, but, we hope, in other NATO countries as well….We are strengthening – not scrapping – missile defense in Europe.” [1]

Remarking that the earlier-envisioned system in Poland and the Czech Republic would not have been operative until 2015 and that opposition among both nations’ parliamentarians would have delayed the process at least another two years, Gates evinced both impatience with and far grander designs for the European wing of the U.S.’s global missile shield program by asserting, “President Obama…decided to discard that plan in favor of a vastly more suitable approach. In the first phase, to be completed by 2011, we will deploy proven, sea-based SM-3 interceptor missiles – weapons that are growing in capability….”

The new deployments, which will be examined in depth later, are to be more mobile and less capable of being anticipated and defended against; will be implemented, according to Gates’ own schedule, at least eight years ahead of the prior plan’s timeline; and will extend worldwide missile interceptor networks into far broader swathes of Eurasia, the Middle East and ultimately the planet as a whole.

Even in the first phase of the adapted – advanced – system that Gates first described on September 17, more developed technologies are to supplant what are already outdated ones that would have been applied to the Polish and Czech deployments. “[A] fixed radar site like the one previously envisioned for the Czech Republic would be far less adaptable than the airborne, space- and ground-based sensors we now plan to use.”

The new system, in addition to being more effective and quickly operationalized, will be much grander in scope and will include several times as many missiles as those intended for Poland, although that nation will still host different variants of medium-range interceptor missiles and, as Gates states below, will still eventually station long-range ground-based missiles.

“The second phase, which will become operational around 2015, will involve putting upgraded SM-3s [Standard Missile-3s] on the ground in Southern and Central Europe. All told, every phase of this plan will include scores of SM-3 missiles, as opposed to the old plan of just 10 ground-based interceptors….[O]ur military will continue research and development on a two-stage ground-based interceptor, the kind that was planned to be put in Poland, as a back-up.”

Scores means some multiple of twenty and one of America’s top military commanders has mentioned 100 as a starting point, as will be seen later.

SM-3s are the missiles employed by the U.S.’s Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense System, which is a sea-based anti-ballistic missile interception program designed to be based off the coasts of targeted nations as needed to render ineffective those nations’ missile launch capabilities, both offensive and defensive.

They are also an integral component of the Pentagon’s Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), a U.S.-led 90-nation international naval surveillance and interdiction project inaugurated by John Bolton in 2003 ostensibly to “interdict weapons of mass destruction” by confronting non-PSI nations’ vessels anywhere in the world.

SM-3s are also to be a staple item for America’s “thousand-ship navy,” first proposed by the then U.S. Navy’s Chief of Naval Operations Michael Mullen, now chairman of the armed forces Joint Chiefs of Staff.

In 2005 Mullen addressed the Seventeenth International Seapower Symposium at the Naval War College, in Newport, Rhode Island and said “the United States Navy cannot, by itself, preserve the freedom and security of the entire maritime domain. It must count on assistance from like-minded nations interested in using the sea for lawful purposes and precluding its use for others that threaten national, regional, or global security.” [2]

Read More

Text Fwd: [Robert Gates]A Better Missile Defense for a Safer Europe

* Informed by Bruce Ganon on Sept. 20, 09

New York Times Op-Ed
September 19, 2009
By ROBERT M. GATES
A Better Missile Defense for a Safer Europe

The future of missile defense in Europe is secure. This reality is contrary to what some critics have alleged about President Obama’s proposed shift in America’s missile-defense plans on the continent — and it is important to understand how and why.

First, to be clear, there is now no strategic missile defense in Europe. In December 2006, just days after becoming secretary of defense, I recommended to President George W. Bush that the United States place 10 ground-based interceptors in Poland and an advanced radar in the Czech Republic. This system was designed to identify and destroy up to about five long-range missiles potentially armed with nuclear warheads fired from the Middle East — the greatest and most likely danger being from Iran. At the time, it was the best plan based on the technology and threat assessment available.

That plan would have put the radar and interceptors in Central Europe by 2015 at the earliest. Delays in the Polish and Czech ratification process extended that schedule by at least two years. Which is to say, under the previous program, there would have been no missile-defense system able to protect against Iranian missiles until at least 2017 — and likely much later.

Last week, President Obama — on my recommendation and with the advice of his national-security team and the unanimous support of our senior military leadership — decided to discard that plan in favor of a vastly more suitable approach. In the first phase, to be completed by 2011, we will deploy proven, sea-based SM-3 interceptor missiles — weapons that are growing in capability — in the areas where we see the greatest threat to Europe.

The second phase, which will become operational around 2015, will involve putting upgraded SM-3s on the ground in Southern and Central Europe. All told, every phase of this plan will include scores of SM-3 missiles, as opposed to the old plan of just 10 ground-based interceptors. This will be a far more effective defense should an enemy fire many missiles simultaneously — the kind of attack most likely to occur as Iran continues to build and deploy numerous short- and medium-range weapons. At the same time, plans to defend virtually all of Europe and enhance the missile defense of the United States will continue on about the same schedule as the earlier plan as we build this system over time, creating an increasingly greater zone of protection.

Steady technological advances in our missile defense program — from kill vehicles to the abilities to network radars and sensors — give us confidence in this plan. The SM-3 has had eight successful tests since 2007, and we will continue to develop it to give it the capacity to intercept long-range missiles like ICBMs. It is now more than able to deal with the threat from multiple short- and medium-range missiles — a very real threat to our allies and some 80,000 American troops based in Europe that was not addressed by the previous plan. Even so, our military will continue research and development on a two-stage ground-based interceptor, the kind that was planned to be put in Poland, as a back-up.

Moreover, a fixed radar site like the one previously envisioned for the Czech Republic would be far less adaptable than the airborne, space- and ground-based sensors we now plan to use. These systems provide much more accurate data, offer more early warning and tracking options, and have stronger networking capacity — a key factor in any system that relies on partner countries. This system can also better use radars that are already operating across the globe, like updated cold war-era installations, our newer arrays based on high-powered X-band radar, allied systems and possibly even Russian radars.

One criticism of this plan is that we are relying too much on new intelligence holding that Iran is focusing more on short- and medium-range weapons and not progressing on intercontinental missiles. Having spent most of my career at the C.I.A., I am all too familiar with the pitfalls of over-reliance on intelligence assessments that can become outdated. As Gen. James Cartwright, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said a few days ago, we would be surprised if the assessments did not change because “the enemy gets a vote.”

Those who say we are scrapping missile defense in Europe are either misinformed or misrepresenting what we are doing. This shift has even been distorted as some sort of concession to Russia, which has fiercely opposed the old plan. Russia’s attitude and possible reaction played no part in my recommendation to the president on this issue. Of course, considering Russia’s past hostility toward American missile defense in Europe, if Russia’s leaders embrace this plan, then that will be an unexpected — and welcome — change of policy on their part. But in any case the facts are clear: American missile defense on the continent will continue, and not just in Central Europe, the most likely location for future SM-3 sites, but, we hope, in other NATO countries as well.

This proposal is, simply put, a better way forward — as was recognized by Prime Minister Donald Tusk of Poland when he called it “a chance for strengthening Europe’s security.” It is a very real manifestation of our continued commitment to our NATO allies in Europe — iron-clad proof that the United States believes that the alliance must remain firm.

I am often characterized as “pragmatic.” I believe this is a very pragmatic proposal. I have found since taking this post that when it comes to missile defense, some hold a view bordering on theology that regards any change of plans or any cancellation of a program as abandonment or even breaking faith. I encountered this in the debate over the Defense Department’s budget for the fiscal year 2010 when I ended three programs: the airborne laser, the multiple-kill vehicle and the kinetic energy interceptor. All were plainly unworkable, prohibitively expensive and could never be practically deployed — but had nonetheless acquired a devoted following.

I have been a strong supporter of missile defense ever since President Ronald Reagan first proposed it in 1983. But I want to have real capacity as soon as possible, and to take maximum advantage of new technologies to combat future threats.

The bottom line is that there will be American missile defense in Europe to protect our troops there and our NATO allies. The new proposal provides needed capacity years earlier than the original plan, and will provide even more robust protection against longer-range threats on about the same timeline as the previous program. We are strengthening — not scrapping — missile defense in Europe.

Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)


* Related blog
http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-missile-defense-other-story.html
Friday, September 18, 2009
[국문 번역]Text Fwd: MISSILE DEFENSE: THE OTHER STORY

[국문 번역]Text Fwd: MISSILE DEFENSE: THE OTHER STORY

* Image source: same as below

* 이미지 내 번역:
'미사일 위협
미 백악관은 이란의 장거리 미사일 능력을 더 이상 즉각적인 위협으로 보지 않고 그 전략을 단-중거리 유도 미사일을 방어하는 것으로 옮겨 갔다.
대략 거리:
이미지 소스: 이스트웨스트 인스티튜트: 에이전스 프랑스 –프레스/ 게티 이미지'


Bruce Gagnon
Friday, September 18, 2009
MISSILE DEFENSE: THE OTHER STORY


Yesterday we witnessed a flurry of emails and articles proclaiming victory after President Obama's announcement that he was going to scrap George W. Bush's plans to deploy missile defense interceptors in Poland and a Star Wars radar in the Czech Republic. There is no doubt that our peace activist friends in those two countries do indeed have reason to celebrate after their hard and determined work to stop those deployments. We also need to recognize and thank the many people around the world who acted in solidarity with them during these past couple years of intensive campaigning.

But now that we've had a day to rejoice, the time has come for more reflection on what the Obama administration intends to do next. I've quickly learned during these eight months of watching Obama in action that when he gives something with one hand it is wise to watch what his other hand is taking away.

In his September 17 speech Obama stated that his new missile defense architecture for Europe would be more "comprehensive than the previous [Bush] program" and would be "enhanced" by NATO involvement.

Secretary of War Robert Gates was left to explain the details of the new missile defense "architecture" that would replace the now rejected deployment plan for Poland and the Czech Republic.

Gates stated that he was the one who had proposed three years ago to deploy the missile defense systems in Poland and the Czech Republic. He concluded that the original plan was no longer the best military "architecture" for the current "threat" from Iran. Thus instead of missile defense interceptors that would target offending missiles in their mid-course of flight, and that had a series of bad test results, the Pentagon now wanted to deploy in northern and southern Europe missile defense systems that had a proven testing record and were more appropriate for the kind of threat now expected from Iran.

The intelligence community now assesses that the threat from Iran's short- and medium-range ballistic missiles, such as the Shahab-3, is developing more rapidly than previously projected," Gates said. "This poses an increased and more immediate threat to our forces on the European continent, as well as to our allies."

Gates continued, "We now have proven capabilities to intercept these [short range] ballistic missiles with land and sea-based interceptors supported by much improved sensors. This allows us to deploy a distributed sensor network rather than a single-fixed site, like the kind slated for the Czech Republic."

US Navy Aegis destroyers, outfitted with Standard Missile-3 (SM-3) missile defense interceptors, would "provide flexibility to move interceptors from one region to another," Gates said. In years to come the SM-3 will be upgraded and be deployed throughout Europe as land-based systems as well. Since 2007 the SM-3 has had eight successful tests, including the February of 2008 shoot-down of a falling military satellite with an SM-3 missile from an Aegis ship in what many saw as proof that these systems also had "anti-satellite" weapons capability.

You can watch brief video clips of Gates here and Obama here from yesterday, or look below at one of my earlier posts for the videos.

The Russians first reaction was positive, as would be expected, since they were deeply concerned that the Poland and Czech deployments could be used by the US as the shield in a first-strike attack. But their concerns have not completely disappeared.

The Washington Post reported today that Maj. Gen. Vladimir Dvorkin, former chief of the Russian military's main research institute for nuclear strategy, cautioned that the reconfigured U.S. system could still pose a threat to Russia. "Everything depends on the scale of such a system," he told the Interfax news agency. "If it comprises a multitude of facilities, including a space echelon, it may threaten the Russian potential of nuclear deterrence."

As described by Gates and his top generals, Obama's new missile defense plan will unfold in three stages. By 2011, the Pentagon will deploy Navy Aegis ships equipped with SM-3 interceptors in the eastern Mediterranean.

A second phase in about 2015 will field an upgraded, land-based SM-3 in allied countries, and discussions are underway with Poland and the Czech Republic on basing the missiles in their territory, Gates said. In 2018, the third phase will deploy a larger and more capable missile, which will allow the system to protect Europe and the United States against short- and intermediate-range rockets and, eventually, intercontinental ballistic missiles.


Bloomberg News reports that, “This shift clearly benefits Lockheed Martin and Raytheon and is negative” for Boeing. “The move away from fixed missile-defense sites in Eastern Europe is a continuation of the more flexible, tactical missile-defense shield that Secretary Gates advocated," said Rob Stallard, an analyst at Macquarie Capital Inc. in New York.

The Pentagon’s 2010 budget seeks 250 Standard Missile-3 interceptors. It also seeks to increase to 27 from 21 the number of warships equipped to launch the Standard Missile-3s and requests $1.6 billion to develop software and hardware to upgrade ships and to develop a ground-based model.

The Pentagon is also now promising Poland that Patriot missiles will still be deployed in that country as previously planned.

So in the end I see this as an adjustment in strategy due to technology as much as anything. The flexible, more mobile, short range missile defense systems are proving ready to go while the former Bush proposal for Poland and Czech Republic included technologies that are not yet proven.

Obama can appear to be stepping back from an immediate confrontation with Russia but in fact he is following the lead of the Pentagon who for some time has been saying that they must move to expand the more promising Navy Aegis-based missile defense system. This program has already been dramatically growing in the Asian-Pacific region and will now be slated for expanded European operations.

Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)



원문 블로그 링크
브루스 개그논
2009년 9월 18일
미사일 방어망: 또 다른 이야기

어제 우리는 오바마 대통령이 조지 W. 부시의 폴란드 내 미사일 방어망 요격 미사일 및, 체코 공화국 내 우주 전쟁 레이다 배치를 취소할 거라는 오바마 대통령의 발표 후에 승리를 선언하는 이 메일 및 기사들의 소동을 목격했읍니다. 실제로 그 두 나라의 평화 활동가 친구들이 그 배치를 막기 위한 힘들고 결의에 다진 활동 이후 그 발표를 축하할 이유들이 있다는 데는 의심의 여지가 없읍니다. 우리는 또한 그 긴장된 캠페인으로 이루어진 지난 2년간 그 들과 연대해 행동했던 전 세계의 많은 사람들을 인정하고 감사해야 할 것입니다.

그러나 기쁨의 날을 보낸 지금, 오바마 행정부가 무엇을 다음에 하려는지 좀더 숙고할 시간이 왔읍니다. 저는 지난 8개월 동안 오바마의 행동을 보면서 그가 무언가를 [선물로] 줄때 그가 한 편으로 무엇을 빼앗아 가는지 경계하는 것이 현명하다는 것을 빨리 깨달았읍니다.

9월 17일 연설에서 오바마는 그의 새로운 유럽 미사일 방어망 구조가 “부쉬의 이 전 프로그램보다 [좀 더] 포괄적이며” 북대서양 조약 기구 NATO의 참여에 의해 “질적으로 좋아질”거라 말했읍니다.

전쟁 장관 로버트 게이츠가 지금은 거절된 폴란드와 체코 공화국 배치 계획을 대신할 새로운 미사일 방어망 “건축 architecture”의 세부를 설명하였읍니다.

게이츠는 그 자신이 3년 전에 폴란드와 체코 공화국에 미사일 방어망 시스템을 배치할 것을 제안했던 사람이라 말했읍니다. 그는 원래의 계획이 이란으로부터 현재의 “위협”에 더 이상 가장 최상의 군사 “건축’이 아님을 결론지었읍니다. 그러므로 비행의 중간 과정에서 공격 미사일들을 명중할 것으로 되어 있었으나 나쁜 실험 결과들의 연속이었던 미사일 방어망 요격기들 대신, 미 국방부는 현재 실험 기록으로 증명되고 현재 이란으로부터 기대되는 위협 종류에 좀 더 적절한 미사일 방어망 시스템을 유럽의 남과 북에 배치하길 원합니다.

미 정보 공동체는 현재 샤하브-3와 같은 이란의 단. 중거리 요격 미사일들로부터의 위협이 “과거에 예상했던 것보다” 빠른 속도로 진전되고 있다고 평가합니다. 게이츠는 “이는 유럽 대륙 우리의 군대 뿐만 아니라 우리 동맹국들에 더 커다랗고 즉각적인 위협을 선사한다.”라고 말합니다.

게이츠는 계속해서 “우리는 현재 이 [단거리] 유도 미사일들을 크게 개선된 센서들로 뒷받침된 지상, 해상 요격 미사일들로 차단할 능력이 있음을 증명했다. 이는 우리가 체코 공화국에 예정했던 것처럼 고정돤 단일 장소보다 분포된 센서 넷워크를 배치하게 할 근거를 준다.” 라고 말합니다.

게이츠는 스탠다드 미사일-3 (SM-3) 방어 요격기들로 장착된 미국 해군 이지스 구축함들은 “한 지역에서 다른 지역으로 요격기들을 움직일 수 있는 유연성을 제공할 것이다.” 라고 말합니다. 향후 몇 년에 걸쳐 이 SM-3는 지상 시스템과 마찬가지로 유럽 전역에 걸쳐 엎그레이드되고 배치될 것입니다. 2007년 이후 SM-3는 8번의 성공적인 실험들을 낳았는 데 그 중 하나는 2008년 2월 떨어지는 군사 위성을 이지스 구축함에서 쏘아올린 SM-3 미사일로 명중한 것으로 많은 이들이 이 시스템이 “대항 위성” 무기 능력을 또한 가진 증거로 본 실험이었읍니다.

어제 게이츠와 오바마의 간략한 비디오 클립을 여기서 각각, 또는 그 비디오 들에 관한 제 이 전의 블로그 포스트에서 보실 수 있읍니다.

러시아인들의 첫 반응은 그들이 폴란드와 체코 공화국 내 [미 미사일 방어망 시스템] 배치가 미국에 의해 선제 공격용 방어로 쓰일 것을 깊게 우려했던 만큼 우리가 기대했던 것처럼 긍정적인 것이었읍니다. 그러나 그들의 우려는 완전히 사라진 것이 아닙니다.

오늘 워싱턴 포스트는 핵전략을 위한 러시아 군대의 주요 연구 기관의 전 수장이었던 블라디미르 드보르킨이 수정된 미국의 시스템이 러시아에 아직도 위협을 선사하고 있다고 주의를 줬다 보고했읍니다. “모든 것은 그러한 시스템의 크기에 달려있다.” 라고 그는 인터팍스 뉴스 에이전시에 말했읍니다. “만약에 그 것이 우주 편대등을 포함, 무수한 시설들이라면, 그것은 러시아의 핵 억제 잠재성을 위협할 것이다.”

게이츠와 그의 고위급 장군들에 의해 묘사된 것처럼, 오바마의 새로운 미사일 방어망 계획은 세 단계에 의해 펼쳐질 것입니다. 2011년까지 미 국방부는 SM-3 요격기들로 장착된 해국 구축함들을 지중해 동쪽에 배치할 것입니다.

2015년 경, 두 번째 국면은 엎그레이드된 지대 SM-3들을 동맹국들에 놓는 것으로 현재 폴란드와 체코 공화국과 그 들의 영토에 이 미사일 기지들을 놓는 토론이 진행중이라고 게이츠는 말했읍니다. 2018년 세 번째 국면은 더 크고 능력있는 미사일들을 배치하는 것으로 그 시스템이 단-중거리 로켓들과 궁극적으로는 대륙간 유도 미사일들에 대항, 유럽과 미 대륙을 보호하게 하는 것입니다.
불룸버그 뉴스 리포츠는 “이 변동이 락히드 마틴과 레이시온에 명확히 이익을 줄 것이며 [보잉에는] 부정적으로 작용할 것”이라 말했읍니다. “동유럽의 고정된 미사일 방어망 시스템 장소들로부터 이동하는 것은 게이츠 장관이 후원했던 좀 더 유연하고 전술적인 미사일 방어 방패들을 계속 설치하는 것”이라고 뉴욕의 맥콰이어 캐피탈 회사의 랍 스털라드 분석가는 말합니다.

미 국방부의 2010년 예산은 250 스탠다드 미사일 요격기 예산들을 찾고 있읍니다. 그 것은 또한 스탠다드 미사일들을 발사할 구조를 갖춘 전쟁 선박들의 숫자를 21개에서 27개로 증가시키려 합니다. 또한 배들을 엎그레이드하고 지대 모델들을 개발하기 위한 소프트 웨어와 하드웨어드을 개발하기 위해 $16억 달러를 요청하고 있읍니다.

미 국방부는 또한 폴란드에게 패트리어트 미사일들이 과거에 계획된 것처럼 그 나라에 배치될 것이라 약속합니다.

그러므로 결국 저는 이 것이 다른 것들처럼 기술전략적 조정에 의한 것임을 봅니다. 폴란드와 체코 공화국에 대한 전 대통령 부쉬의 제안이 아직 입증되지 않은 기술들을 포함함에 따라 [현 오바마 정부가] 더 유연하고 더 움직임이 자유로운 단 거리 미사일 방어 시스템이 진전될 채비를 갖춘 것으로 보입니다.

오바마는 러시아와의 즉각적 대립에서 뒤로 물러난 것처럼 보일 수 있으나 사실 그는 좀 더 촉망되는 미 해군 이지스 기반 미사일 방어 시스템을 확장하는 것으로 이동해야 한다고 한동안 말한 미 국방부의 주도에 따르고 있읍니다. 그 프로그램은 이미 아시아 태평양 지역에서 극적으로 증가하고 있었으나 확장된 유럽 작전들에 예정될 것입니다.

브루스 개그논(Bruce K. Gagnon)
코디네이터/ [사무 총장](Coordinator/[Secretary])
우주의 무기와 핵을 반대하는 글로벌 넷워크(Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space)
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)



* 역주 관계 블로그

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-better-missile-defense-for.html
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Text Fwd: [Robert Gates]A Better Missile Defense for a Safer Europe
[로버츠 게이츠] 더 안전한 유럽을 위한 더 나은 미사일 방어
브루스 개그논 알림

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-us-missile-shield-plans.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Text Fwd: U.S. Missile Shield Plans: Retreat Or Advance?
Rick Rozoff
2009년 9월 17일
[나토 중단]기사소개: 미국 미사일 방패 계획: 후퇴인가/ 진전인가?
릭 로조프 씀

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-white-house-fact-sheet-on-us.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Text Fwd: White House Fact Sheet on US Missile Defense Policy
2009년 9월 17일
[미사일 방어 후원 동맹 블로그] 기사 소개: 미국 미사일 방어 정책에 관한 백악관 문서

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/nousbases-mdaa-breaking-videos.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Text/ Video Fwd: [nousbases] [MDAA] Breaking Videos - President Obama, Secretary Gates and General Cartwright
[미사일 방어 후원 동맹] 기사 및 비디오 소개: 긴급 비디오: 오바마 대통령, 게이츠 장관, 카트라이트 장군
브루스 개그논 알림

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-europeforpeaceorg-victory-in.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Text Fwd: [europeforpeace_org] victory in the Czech Republic!
기사 소개: [평화를 위한 유럽] 체코 공화국 승리!
안나 폴로 알림

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-obama-scrapping-missile-shield.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Text Fwd: Obama scrapping missile shield for Czech, Poland
[워싱턴 포스트]기사 소개: 오바마, 체코 공화국과 폴란드의 미사일 방패 취소하다.
브루스 개그논 알림

Text Fwd: U.S. Missile Shield Plans: Retreat Or Advance?

StopNATO and Rick Rozoff blog
September 17, 2009
U.S. Missile Shield Plans: Retreat Or Advance?
Rick Rozoff

On September 17 the White House and the Pentagon, Barack Obama and Robert Gates, announced that after a sixty-day review of the project the U.S. is going to abandon plans to station ten ground-based interceptor missiles in Poland and a forward-based X-band missile radar installation in the Czech Republic.

The deployments were negotiated with both prospective host countries by the preceding George W. Bush administration under the guise of protecting the United States from alleged long-range missile attacks by what were described as rogue states: Iran and North Korea.

Interceptor missiles in Poland would only be of use in protecting the U.S. if Iran possessed intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of being fired over the Arctic Ocean. No serious person has ever suggested Iran has such a capability or ever will.

But Russian ambassador to NATO Dmitry Rogozin remarked last November that U.S. missiles in Poland could hit his nation's capital of Moscow in four minutes, as NATO warplanes that have patrolled the skies over the Baltic Sea since 2004 could reach Russia's second largest city, St. Petersburg, in five minutes.

Leading Russian officials, political and military, have unanimously accused Washington of targeting their own nation and its strategic forces rather than Iran with its third position missile shield plans.

Surveys have consistently demonstrated that a majority of Poles oppose the stationing of American missiles and the troops that would accompany them in their nation. Polls in the Czech Republic show over two-thirds opposition to the basing of interceptor missile radar in that country.

Much of the world, then, was relieved to read the news that the U.S. was reversing course and renouncing designs to base missile shield facilities in Eastern Europe.

What Washington has stated, though, is not so straightforward.

President Obama's statement began with "President Bush was right that Iran's ballistic missile program poses a significant threat. And that's why I'm committed to deploying strong missile defense systems which are adaptable to the threats of the 21st century."

The second sentence confirms the position on so-called missile defense that his administration has repeatedly and unswervingly voiced since coming to power in January: A global interceptor missile system will be deployed when and exactly where it is proven to be most capable of achieving its purpose and in the most cost-effective manner. In American vernacular, the White House and the Pentagon want more bang for the buck.

The underlying motive for a universal interceptor missile system - based on land, at sea, in the air and in space - is to secure uncontested American international military superiority by making itself and key allies impenetrable to retaliation by nations like Russia and China.

Obama also said, "I have approved the unanimous recommendations of my Secretary of Defense and my Joint Chiefs of Staff to strengthen America's defenses against ballistic missile attack. This new approach will provide capabilities sooner, build on proven systems, and offer greater defenses against the threat of missile attack than the 2007 European missile defense program."

There is nothing equivocal about that pledge. Obama is promising a missile shield system not only more effective but more ambitious than the one he has rejected.

The major drawback of ground-based missiles in Poland is that they would be fixed-site deployments. For several years now Russia has warned that it was prepared to base Iskander theater ballistic missiles in its Kaliningrad region, which borders Poland, should Washington deploy its missiles to that nation.

Obama and his defense secretary Robert Gates have suggested a more mobile, less detectable system that cannot be as easily monitored and if need be neutralized.

The American president boasted that "we have made specific and proven advances in our missile defense technology, particularly with regard to land- and sea-based interceptors and the sensors that support them. Our new approach will, therefore, deploy technologies that are proven [and] do so sooner than the previous program." That is, he proposed an alternative that in no manner indicates a retreat from his predecessor's plan.

Perhaps quite the contrary, as he announced a "new missile defense architecture in Europe [that] will provide stronger, smarter, and swifter defenses of American forces and America's allies. It is more comprehensive than the previous program; it deploys capabilities that are proven and cost-effective; and it sustains and builds upon our commitment to protect the U.S. homeland against long-range ballistic missile threats; and it ensures and enhances the protection of all our NATO allies."

The last eleven words are key to understanding why the U.S. is preparing to abandon bilateral arrangements with Poland and the Czech Republic. The shift in policy is one of emphasis and not essence and portends the expansion and not the constriction of missile deployment plans in Europe.

The following words of Obama's clarify the situation yet further:

"This approach is also consistent with NATO missile - NATO's missile defense efforts and provides opportunities for enhanced international collaboration going forward. We will continue to work cooperatively with our close friends and allies, the Czech Republic and Poland....Together we are committed to a broad range of cooperative efforts to strengthen our collective defense, and we are bound by the solemn commitment of NATO's Article V that an attack on one is an attack on all."

To invoke NATO's Article 5 is to speak of war. The North Atlantic Treaty founding document of 1949 describes it as follows:

"The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."

* Read More

Text/ Video Fwd: [nousbases] [MDAA] Breaking Videos - President Obama, Secretary Gates and General Cartwright

* Text/Video informed by Bruce Gagnon on Sept. 17, 2009

Missile Defense Advocacy Alliance Newsletter

September 17, 2009, President Obama announces that the U.S. will change

course on Eastern European Missile Defense Shield

STATEMENT BY RIKI ELLISON, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER OF THE MISSILE DEFENSE ADVOCACY ALLIANCE ON TODAY'S MISSILE DEFENSE ANNOUNCEMENT "The withdrawal of the missile defense sites in Europe and introduction of a new missile defense architecture addresses the second and third priorities of missile defense stated today by the JCS and Pentagon of protection for deployed troops and allies but does not address the first stated priority which is the missile defense protection of the United States Homeland. The equal protection of the Eastern United States from long range ballistic missiles from Iran must be addressed as it is not equal to that of the protection provided today for the rest of the country from long range ballistic missiles. The European third site addressed the protection of the Eastern Seaboard of the US Homeland, the new architecture does not." -Riki Ellison Click here to see the video of President Obama's Press Conference "After an extensive process, I have approved the unanimous recommendations of my secretary of defense and my joint chiefs of staff to strengthen America's defenses against ballistic-missile attack," President Obama said. "Our new missile defense architecture in Europe will provide stronger, smarter and swifter defenses of American forces and America's allies," Mr. Obama said. "It is more comprehensive than the previous program, it deploys capabilities that are proven and cost effective, and it sustains and builds upon our commitment to protect the U.S. homeland." Click here to see the video of the Pentagon Press Conference with Secretary Robert Gates and General James Cartwright Gates said the decision to abandon the Bush administration's plans came about because of a change in the U.S. perception of the threat posed by Iran. According to Gates U.S. intelligence advised that short- and medium-range missiles from Iran now pose a greater near-term threat than the intercontinental ballistic missiles the Bush plan addressed. Gen. Cartwright says that the changes to U.S. plans are necessary because initial planning was only to prevent attacks by a "rogue nation" with a small number of missiles. He says that the threat now, from countries like North Korea and Iran, is more on the order of hundreds of missiles. Click Here to visit MDAA's Website Click Here to visit MDAA's Blog Click Here to join MDAA Click Here to learn more about MDAA * Related blog http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2009/09/more-details-on-missile-defense-in.html Thursday, September 17, 2009 MORE DETAILS ON MISSILE DEFENSE IN EUROPE

Text Fwd: [europeforpeace_org] victory in the Czech Republic!

*Image Source

1. Czech News Agency
2. Russia Today

* Text Fwd from Anna Polo on Sept 17, 2009

"Hello friends,

as you probably know, Barack Obama has suspended the plan to install the Missile Defense system in Centra Europe. This is a big victory for all of us who have been fighting against this terrible project!

Attached is our press release in english as well as a longer statement on this issue. Feel free to circulate it around.

big hugs and big thanks from Prague!

Jan (Tami)"

Statement of Jan Tamas on the suspension of
the Missile Defense project in Central Europe

Today is a big day that represents a new era in international relations; relations that were during the recent years poisoned with continuous armament and conflicts, with unilateral actions and disrespect for the will of ordinary people.

The 70% of Czechs are celebrating; it feels like a liberation day here in Prague. Today is a big victory for nonviolence.

At the same time we are very cautiously watching the reaction of powerful people, who for a long time have been proponents of the project and who probably have personal interest in the establishment of these new military bases in Central Europe.

We understand that the real threat today comes not from national states, but rather from economic and military-industry power groups that operate outside of any state control and could escalate international tensions any time.

We express our full support for president Obama in all his disarmament efforts, especially in the area of nuclear disarmament.

The struggle has been a very intense one and was carried forward by humanists and many other organizations around the world. We thank you all for all your support.

We hope that this victory will be a positive example for all the movements in Europe and around the world that are opposing the military bases and the militarist agenda in general.

This success is a good-luck wish to The World March for Peace and Non-violence that will begin in just a few days, on October 2 and that will unite people from around the world in the struggle for a better tomorrow.

See you all during the March!

Jan Tamas

President of the Humanist Party

Leader of non-violent movement against US base in the Czech Republic

Prague, September 17, 2009

Press release of the Humanist Movement in the Czech Republic

Czech humanists welcome Obama's plan to cancel missile defense enlargement
Prague, September 17, 2009

Members of the Humanist movement welcome the decision of US president Barack Obama to cancel the missile defense enlargement previously planned for the Czech Republic and Poland.

“We have been active more than three years in the struggle to prevent this plan from materializing. We are very happy that finally the position of the US administration is in line with the will of majority of Czechs”, said Jan Tamas, spokesman of the Nonviolence movement referring to the two thirds of Czech citizens who disagreed with the project. “We will continue to support Barack Obama in his plan for nuclear disarmament, because clearly nuclear weapons are the most dangerous weapons of mass destruction that exist today.”

In the past three years members of the movement have held talks with members of the Czech Parliament, European Parliament, national parliaments of other European countries as well as the US Congress. They have also organized many demonstrations in different European cities as well as several international conferences debating this issue in Europe and the United States. Jan Tamas and Jan Bednar went on a 21 day hunger strike against the plan last June.

Overall, the anti-base movement is considered to be one of the biggest civic movements of Czech recent history.

There will be a big celebration of all the groups involved in the struggle today at 6:30 pm in Prague, Tyrsova 1. Members of the groups will have a champagne toast and give short statements for the media.

The Humanist movement is a worldwide movement of volunteers working together for a nonviolent change towards a more just world. It originated in the late 1960s in Argentina and since that time has spread across the world. Its Czech members have for the past three years nonviolently opposed the US missile defense base planned to be installed there. They gained wider recognition with the hunger strike of two of its members Jan Tamas and Jan Bednar in May 2008, the following sequential hunger strike with 300 participants, as well as several international conferences about the topics of US Missile Defense and disarmament.

Contact information:

Tyršova 1, Prague. Open to public every day from 9am to 5pm

www.nonviolence.cz

Jan Tamáš, Ph.D., tel. 776 785 839, email: jan.tamas@humanisti.cz

Jan Bednář, tel. 608 731 162, email: jan.bednar@nenasili.cz


* Related articles

StopNATO
Czech Anti-Missile Activist: Eliminating Threat Of WW III
Russia Today
September 17, 2009

StopNATO
“US victory to scrap AMD a big victory for the Czech people”
Czech News Agency
September 17, 2009
Czech left welcomes U.S. decision to give up radar base




* Related blog

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-obama-scrapping-missile-shield.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Text Fwd: Obama scrapping missile shield for Czech, Poland

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2009/09/history-miliatry-science-and-victories.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
HISTORY, MILITARY SCIENCE, AND VICTORIES OF SORTS

http://nobasestorieskorea.blogspot.com/2009/09/text-fwd-us-plans-coordinated-global.html
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Text Fwd: U.S. Plans Coordinated Global Counterintelligence Operations

Text Fwd: Obama scrapping missile shield for Czech, Poland

Text informed by Bruce Gagnon on Sept. 17, 2009

Washington Post
Obama scrapping missile shield for Czech, Poland
By KAREL JANICEK and WILLIAM J. KOLE
The Associated Press
Thursday, September 17, 2009 7:30 AM

PRAGUE -- President Barack Obama has decided to scrap plans for a U.S. missile defense shield in the Czech Republic and Poland that had deeply angered Russia, the Czech prime minister confirmed Thursday.

NATO's new chief hailed the move as "a positive step" and a Russian analyst said Obama's decision will increase the chances that Russia will cooperate more closely with the United States in the dispute over Iran's nuclear program.

Premier Jan Fischer told reporters that Obama phoned him overnight to say that "his government is pulling out of plans to build a missile defense radar on Czech territory."

"The same happened with Poland. Poland was informed in the same way about this intention," Fischer said.

He said Obama assured him that the "strategic cooperation" between the Czech Republic and the U.S. would continue, and that Washington considers the Czechs among its closest allies.

In Poland, officials declined to confirm Fischer's remarks, saying they were waiting for a formal announcement from Washington.

The plan, proposed by the Bush administration, aimed to defend the United States and its European allies against a possible missile attack from Iran or elsewhere in the Middle East. In all, 10 interceptor rockets were to have been stationed in Poland and a radar system based in the Czech Republic.

But Russia was livid over the prospect of having U.S. interceptor rockets in countries so close to its territory, and the Obama administration has sought to improve strained ties with the Kremlin.

"The U.S. president's decision is a well-thought (out) and systematic one," said Konstantin Kosachev, head of the foreign affairs committee in the State Duma, the lower house of the Russian parliament. "It reflects understanding that any security measure can't be built entirely on the basis of one nation."

"Now we can talk about restoration of (the) strategic partnership between Russia and the United States," Kosachev added.

Alexei Arbatov, head of the Russian Academy of Science's Center for International Security, told a Moscow radio station on Thursday that the U.S. was giving in on missile defense to get more cooperation from Russia on Iran.

"The United States is reckoning that by rejecting the missile-defense system or putting it off to the far future, Russia will be inclined together with the United States to take a harder line on sanctions against Iran," he said.

Czechs and Poles, along with some other Eastern Europeans, have complained of what many perceive as neglect by the Obama administration.

That, in turn, has prompted a U.S. diplomatic effort to reassure the countries that America - which helped liberate them from decades of communist-era isolation and helped bring them into NATO - still values them as friends and partners.

Fischer said after a review of the missile defense system, the U.S. now considers the threat of an attack using short- and mid-range missiles greater than one using long-range rockets.

"That's what the Americans assessed as the most serious threat," and Obama's decision was based on that, he said.

Obama took office undecided about the European system and said he would study it. His administration never sounded enthusiastic about it, and European allies have been preparing for an announcement that the White House would not complete the shield as designed.

Obama himself had hinted that the U.S. was rethinking the plan. In a major foreign policy speech in April in Prague, he said Washington would proceed with developing the system as long as Iran posed a threat to U.S. and European security.

But a top military leader, Marine Gen. James Cartwright, recently suggested that the U.S. may have underestimated how long it would take Iran to develop long-range missiles.

The Czech government had stood behind the planned radar system despite fierce opposition from the public, which staged numerous protests.

Critics feared the Czech Republic would be targeted by terrorists if it agreed to host the radar system, which was planned for the Brdy military installation 90 kilometers (55 miles) southwest of Prague, the capital.

In Washington, Defense Secretary Robert Gates scheduled a news conference Thursday with Cartwright, the point man on the technical challenge of arraying missiles and interceptors to defend against long-range missiles.

The decision to scrap the plan will have future consequences for U.S. relations with eastern Europe.

"If the administration approaches us in the future with any request, I would be strongly against it," said Jan Vidim, a lawmaker with Czech Republic's conservative Civic Democratic Party, which supported the missile defense plan.



Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space
PO Box 652
Brunswick, ME 04011
(207) 443-9502
http://www.space4peace.org
globalnet@mindspring.com
http://space4peace.blogspot.com (Blog)