La Russophobe has moved!

You should be automatically redirected in 6 seconds. If not, visit
http://larussophobe.wordpress.com
and update your bookmarks.

Thursday, May 31, 2007

Annals of Russian Pathology: The Missiles of May

The International Herald Tribune reports on a Polish diplomat labeling Russian opposition to defensive missile systems in Poland "pathological."

Poland's top negotiator on planned U.S. missile defense bases in Europe said Tuesday that Russia has revealed a "psychological problem" in its opposition to the plan, and said Warsaw will ask U.S. President George W. Bush how seriously to take Moscow's threats.

Poland is considering whether to allow the U.S. to place 10 defensive interceptors at a base in northern Poland that would be able to destroy possible missiles from Iran. A radar system in the neighboring Czech Republic would be part of the system. Russia has voiced fierce opposition to the possible sites in formerly communist eastern European countries, and one general has warned that the facilities could be targeted.

The Russians "absolutely know that 10 missiles which are not equipped with any kind of warhead cannot do any harm against Russian military might," Witold Waszczykowski, the deputy foreign minister and top Polish negotiator, said in an interview with The Associated Press. "From a technical point of view, we cannot convince them. They ignore, they neglect our arguments, and they are saying that any kind of a military installation on the territory of Poland, Czech Republic — that means on the territory of new member NATO states — is not acceptable for them," Waszczykowski said. "That means they have a psychological problem, a kind of mental problem" preventing them from accepting that the two nations "are really sovereign — are not part of Soviet or Russian domination any more."

Waszczykowski said when Bush visits Poland on June 8, he should give the Poles some "political feedback" on how seriously to take the threat, and address what the U.S. can do to protect Poland from any Russian retaliation. He said Warsaw fears the Russians will react by building up their forces and placing weapons on the Polish border — either in their exclave of Kaliningrad, which borders Poland, or in Belarus, a strong Russian ally. "If we are confronted with such rhetoric from Russia, should we talk about additional protection for the base?" he asked. "Should we discuss some additional measures like reinforcement of NATO planning, maybe, or some kind of American declarations? What happens in case of troubles?" he said. "We would like to hear from President Bush, of course, what are the answers for this kind of changing attitude of Russia." In February, a top Russian officer, Gen. Nikolai Solovtsov, said if the Polish and Czech governments go ahead with hosting the sites, "the Strategic Missile Forces will be capable of targeting these facilities if a relevant decision is made." Waszczykowski held talks last week in Warsaw with John Rood, U.S. assistant secretary of state for international security and nonproliferation. Neither divulged specifics from the talks but said they were going well and that a next round would be held in Washington in late June. Waszczykowski said a deal could come in early fall. However, one topic addressed was Polish concern over Russia's stance. "We are wondering — and we actually asked Americans during this discussion — how they evaluate the situation, if they think it's only rhetoric for the domestic politics of Russia, or if it is a kind of rhetoric we need to consider, and face and provide some answers," Waszczykowski said. "No one knows ... how to understand Putin's speech ... how to understand the whole climate, the atmosphere created in Russia," he said. A further issue overshadowing the talks is the "feeling of disillusionment" toward the U.S. that has grown since the start of the war in Iraq, Waszczykowski said. "There's a feeling in Poland that although we've spent already four years in Iraq, we are considered by Americans as a kind of junior partner," Waszczykowski said.

A recent example, he said, came during an international conference on Iraq in early May in Sharm el-Sheik, Egypt, to which no Polish representative was invited. Even though Poland sent ground troops to the 2003 war, and still has 900 soldiers there, it was left off the invitation list. But Italy, which has since pulled out its troops, and Germany and France, which opposed the war, were represented. So were Syria and Iran. "Many politicians have asked how we can trust if we are treated and considered by them like this," Waszczykowski said.



3 comments:

Russian patriot said...

RE:
Waszczykowski said: That means they have a psychological problem, a kind of "mental problem" preventing them from accepting that the two nations "are really sovereign — are not part of Soviet or Russian domination any more."

Yes! Iran is a sovereign nation too, and out of American domination any more. Why the USA care about Iranian armament and nuclear research program? Can Mr. (pan) Waszczykowski ask President Bush about it when he visits Poland on June 8? It may help him to understand the Russian point.

The following citation of himself may help too:
[.... Warsaw fears the Russians will react by building up their forces and placing weapons on the Polish border — either in their exclave of Kaliningrad, which borders Poland, or in Belarus, a strong Russian ally. ...
Should we talk about additional protection for the base?" ... "Should we discuss some additional measures like reinforcement of NATO planning.... What happens in case of troubles?"
]

Aha! It comes out that possible Russian military build up is something for NATO to be worried about or even to have fears.
And NATO closing to the Russian borders, USA bilding radars, missles, and military bases around is just a nice behavior which Russia must be happy with?

What a hypocrisy!!!

elmer said...

The hypocrisy is, again, Russian.

Russia screams about NATO - but it has naval and other forces in Ukraine, in Crimea.

NATO is not building an empire.

Russia wants to re-build an empire.

NATO does not talk about "Estonian pigs."

Russia spreads all sorts of snorting and sneering at Estonia, and then launches cyberattacks against Estonia.

You, yourself, try to justify Russia being a bully against Estonia.

The list goes on.........

Russian patriot said...

Come on elmer!

How Russian naval base is relevant to NATO expansion?
Had you known about Russian history not from your parents words and La Russophobe incompetent comments you would not write such a rubbish.
Russian naval base in Sevastopol has been there for about 200 years, since Ekaterina II. Wwhen the Crimean Tartar state was taken by Russians. The Crimean peninsula was given as a gift Russia to the Ukraine in 1954, when 300 years of Russia-Ukraine Union Charter was celebrated. In 1992 when the Soviet Union desintegrated Russia did not take it back and the gratefull "hohols" signed up the naval base lease agreement with Russia till 2017 y. It was the main base of the USSR Black Sea Fleet for 200 years, and after the separation the fleet did not have any other suitable ports to relocate to.

NATO expansion is kind of a newer phenomena.

NATO not talking about "Esonian pigs"? They do things which are worse: they accepted them in NATO.
And Estonia is 200 miles from St-Petersburg.
BTW every nation has its favorite animal, simbolizing the nation. like Russian bear, Chechens' volf and so on...
Estonia is famous with their pigs. They also have mooses in Estonia, a good strong animal, but Estonians use this word to call Finns. So not a lot available. Why not "a pig"? Though it is my idea and I do not think you are supposed to blame all the Russians for this word. Are you an Estonian? Ok. You can choose raccoon, they have them there and the brand seems to be avalable. Or a Baltic herring. Pretty small fish, though tastes good.

Cyberattacks?
Russian computer kids are playing. Do not pay attention.