Finally, Some Sanity on Missiles

The U.S. proposal to install an anti-ballistic missile shield in eastern Europe appears unlikely to advance under the watch of its conceiver, President Bush. The new Polish government says it won't permit the shield right now because it's not clear that the next U.S. president will want it, and meanwhile it's not worth aggravating Russia.

Bush wants to place components of the shield in Poland and the Czech Republic. Russia's Vladimir Putin has opposed it, and Polish Foreign Minister Radek Sikorski has provided his government's position in an interview with the Polish newspaper Gazeta Wyborcza. They were kindly passed on in an article yesterday by Judy Dempsey at The New York Times.

Poland's shift is gratifying news for those like myself who think that there are so many divisive issues on the table with Russia that there's no reason to add another, especially when the shield is unreliable at best when decoys are used. When the shield definitely works, let's talk deployment.

The Polish position is built on multiple levels. It's tied up with Moscow's plans to build the Nord Stream natural gas pipeline from Russia to Germany, crossing the Baltic Sea and averting nations with which Russia has tense relations, like Poland.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk wants Russia to reconsider Nord Stream. If the gas continues to cross Poland, Russia would find it harder to cut off the country during predictable periods of strained relations. Poland has also raised environmental concerns about installing a pipeline in the Baltic.

Moscow's Red Lines: Kosovo, Missiles and Berezovsky

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has used the occasion of a university speech to lay down an implacable position on some of the most divisive issues between Moscow and the West. It was another indication that Moscow is engaged as much in policy as in image-building as someone no longer to be trifled with.

Here is the first paragraph of the Agence France Press story: Russia will not back down on "red line" issues including the future of Kosovo and opposition to US plans for an anti-missile defence system in central Europe, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Monday. Read story

And an important quote from the piece: Lavrov said that some were worried by "the rapid rebirth of our country as one of the leading countries of the world. However, this does not mean that it's necessary to think up yet another myth about the Russian threat."

Steve's comment: Lavrov made the remarks today at Moscow State Institute of International Affairs. For those accustomed to negotiating with Moscow, whether during the Soviet or post-Soviet period, it is nothing new for it to "stick to our position until the end," as Lavrov put it.

Its immovable positions, he said, include a refusal to hand over Andrei Lugovoi to Britain in the case of the Alexander Litvinenko murder, rejecting Kosovo independence unless Belgrade itself agrees, and opposing Washington's plans to install an anti-missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic (on the last item, one wonders about the hulabaloo on either side over an as-yet unproven system).

Lavrov also resurrected Moscow's chagrin over Britain's sheltering of oligarch Boris Berezovsky, whom he called one of several "odious characters" from Russia living there.

As a whole, these do not differ fundamentally from postures Russia has taken previously during the post-Soviet period. What is different is that it appears unlikely this time to shift position. And that appears to be as much show as principle.