Russia May Agree To Share Missile Defense Radar Data With United States: Gates
No Time To Lose, Because Iran Is Just Two To Three Years Away From Missiles Able To Hit Europe
By Dave Ahearn
Secretary of Defense Robert Gates told both House and Senate lawmakers that he sees a chance that Russia may drop its bombastic, bellicose threats to employ missiles to annihilate the planned European Missile Defense (EMD) system if it is built.
Rather, Gates said, Russia may abandon its strident opposition to the EMD system if Moscow can participate in the EMD by sharing radar data. (Please see transcript in this issue excerpting his remarks.)
Gates reiterated this assessment in separate appearances before the Senate Armed Services Committee (SASC) and the House Armed Services Committee (HASC).
The SASC chairman, Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.), raised the issue, asking, “Would you support further exploration with the Russians of the possible cooperative arrangement in the area of missile defense?”
Gates said he would, and that such an approach might well work.
“I think that there’s real potential there,” Gates said.
He based that on conversations he has had with former Russian President Vladimir Putin and current President Dmitry Medvedev about Russia and the United States possibly sharing EMD radar data.
“I’ve outlined it to, first to President Putin and subsequently to President Mevedev,” Gates said. “I think there’s some real opportunity here.”
He also said there may be a possibility to convince Russians that their objections over the past several years are false, when Moscow leaders claimed that EMD interceptors would threaten to knock down Russian intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).
The United States has been incredulous, saying EMD interceptors would be too slow to catch the ICBMs, and in any event would be targeted to take down incoming missiles launched by Iran from the south, not by Russia to the north.
“Russia’s clearly not the target of our missile defense endeavors,” Gates said. “Iran is. We have a mutual concern there.”
As well, Gates said Russian intelligence is flat wrong when it says Iran won’t have long-range missiles for a decade or more.
“I think that the Russians have an unrealistic view of the timeline when an Iranian missile with the range to attack much of Russia and much of Europe will be available,” Gates asserted. “But I am very open to the idea of pursuing further cooperation on missile defense with Russia.”
Levin asked whether President Obama shares that view and interest.
“Frankly, the subject has not been discussed, as far as I know,” Gates said. “I expect it to be on the agenda here pretty soon.”
Obama has said that missile defense is needed, but that he wishes to be sure that missile shield systems work before they are procured and deployed.
Aside from Obama’s secretary of defense, his other major foreign policy Cabinet member also may see the EMD as needed, with a chance that Russia may be persuaded to drop its opposition if Moscow is included in a radar data-sharing deal.
Levin said he spoke with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on the issue, “and I think her thoughts are very similar to yours. And I think that’s good news.”
Clinton until this year was a Democratic senator from New York who served on the Senate committee with Levin.
To be sure, however, Russian leaders still are voicing opposition to the EMD, though in a softer tone, saying they won’t deploy Russian missiles near planned EMD sites as long as construction work doesn’t begin on the missile defense shield. (Please see separate story in this issue.)
Gates elaborated on his assessment that icy Russian opposition to the EMD may be starting to thaw.
“I had the distinct impression when I presented a range of opportunities for [EMD] cooperation and transparency to then-President Putin, that he was actually taken by some of the ideas, that there were some opportunities for cooperation, and I think — being an old Kremlinologist, what got my attention was the fact that when [U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza] Rice and I first sat down to meet with Putin, and they brought in all the press, Putin just basically beat the tar out of the United States on every conceivable subject.
“And once the press left, we then had a nice civil conversation. But after our meeting, it was clear he had talked to — in his comments to the press … very positive, that he heard some very interesting ideas.”
The same warming transpired when Gates and Rice met with their Russian counterparts.
“When we began our two-plus-two meeting with Foreign Minister Lavrov, and my Russian counterpart, Lavrov — instead of opening with the same kind of screed against the United States – [he] started off by talking about how there’s been some interesting exchanges of ideas, interesting possibilities for cooperation, and they look forward to pursuing that subsequently. We’ve also heard informally from some of their military that there was interest in pursuing some of these possibilities. They were intrigued by the possibility of working together on some of this.”
Possibilities for cooperation could include a joint radar-data-sharing center in Moscow.
From comments by various Russians, Gates inferred, “I think if we were able to get some of the political baggage out of the way, that there is actually some potential for cooperation.”
Getting beyond the Russian issue, Gates also stressed that the EMD system is needed, vitally, to protect Europe and American interests there. And this is something that has been recognized, overtly and explicitly, by European nations and NATO.
“All of the NATO heads of government unanimously last April in Bucharest endorsed the importance of a NATO-wide, European-wide missile defense capability,” in which the EMD system would be a critical component. “So this is a commitment that has been made by the alliance. And so I think we at least need to take it very seriously.”
True, Gates said, the EMD system isn’t some advanced asset that would be able to take down any type or number of incoming missiles. The EMD system can function, but within limitations.
“We have a missile defense capability that is able to take on a rudimentary threat,” Gates explained. “It is clearly not aimed at dealing with a large-scale threat, for example, from either Russia or from China. I happen to think it’s important. I think that having a layered defense such as we are building, that includes the Ground-based [Missile Defense] interceptors [in Alaska and California], is very important.”
Rep. Ellen Tauscher (D-Calif.), who chairs the HASC strategic forces subcommittee overseeing missile defense programs, has criticized the GMD program, because even though it repeatedly has annihilated target missiles in tests, those targets haven’t challenged the GMD system by deploying confusing countermeasures.
Levin agreed that Europeans have backed the EMD system.
“NATO has been supportive of what we’ve been doing up to now in Poland and the Czech Republic,” Levin said. Then he asked, “Would NATO, in your judgment, likely support those kinds of explorations [of EMD radar-data-links] between us and the Russians, if we undertook them?”
“I think they’d welcome it,” Gates said.
After that testimony before senators in an hours-long morning hearing, Gates — even though he was recovering from surgery on his left arm, which was in a sling — went before the HASC for hours more testimony and questioning.
He was welcomed warmly by Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), co-chairman and co-founder of the Congressional Missile Defense Caucus, who termed Gates “a tremendous leader in the previous administration … very effective at advocating for the European Missile Defense site.”
Gates again stressed that NATO heads of state have backed the EMD system.
And he repeated his assessment that Russia might drop its opposition to the EMD if Moscow can participate in sharing radar data:
“That would clearly please the Europeans, please our NATO allies, and frankly I think — the Russians — my conversations [with President Putin] and other conversations that we’ve had with their military, I think that they’re actually — if you put the politics aside, there’s actually some interest in this.”
Gates also reiterated that Russians are wrong as to how soon Iran will have a long-range missile able to reach Russia and European capitals.
“I think their intelligence is just bad,” Gates said. “I think our view is that they could have a missile with that kind of range in two or three years. The Russians talk in terms of 10 or 15 years. And I just think that’s wrong.”
For Franks, that is a critical matter, noting that the EMD system can devalue any Iranian offensive missile developments — if, that is, the EMD system is brought online soon enough.
Franks worried that the United States may find it has dropped the ball, and that it is too late to respond to the emergent Iranian threat.
“If we find three years from now that Iran has just gained more time, and more fully developed their capability, perhaps even to the point where they have become a nuclear power — which I think is a profound threat to the human family — what will we do then, Secretary Gates?”
But Gates said all is not lost, at least not yet.
“I think that there are still opportunities available to us,” Gates said. Economic sanctions imposed by the West have caused greater pain for Iran since the price of the oil it sells fell from $140 a barrel to $40 a barrel, he explained.
And he said the West should pitch the idea to Iranian leaders that if they become a nuclear power with major missile capabilities, then other Middle Eastern nations will go nuclear as well, imperiling Iran. “I think we have a compelling case that we can make,” Gates said.
However, the West has been arguing, threatening and negotiating with Iran for years, and Iran meanwhile is developing longer-range missile capabilities, and producing more nuclear materials in thousands of centrifuges. The closer Iran moves to becoming a nuclear power, the more urgently EMD advocates have said there is no time to lose: the EMD system must be built, and quickly.