Russkiy Mir Foundation Executive Director Vyacheslav Nikonov gave an interview to Rossiyskaya Gazeta. He commented on Russian President Dmitriy Medvedev’s statement in which he announced Russia’s position concerning plans for the deployment of a European antimissile security system.
– Why was Dmitriy Medvedev's statement made specifically now? What was the last straw that made Russia formulate its position so harshly on the US national holiday, Thanksgiving Day?
– The Russian president's statement did not spoil the holiday for ordinary Americans – they are not very interested in politics.
The fact that Medvedev announced Russia's position on missile defense right now is absolutely logical. The stimulus was the conversation between Dmitriy Medvedev and Barack Obama at the APEC (Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation) summit in Honolulu, in the course of which it became clear that the United States does not intend to concede on a single point relating to the question of the deployment of the missile defense system in Europe. The fact that the United States adopted a rather uncompromising stance was, I think, the last straw.
– Will this tough line by the sides not lead to complications in Russian-American relations and the start of an arms race, which in the conditions of the world financial crisis is too costly for both countries' budgets and carries the risk of creating a new seat of political tension?
– I do not think so. Nobody is talking about an arms race. In this case Moscow is simply indicating that the creation of a missile defense system directed against Russia is unacceptable. At one time there was the ABM Treaty, from which the United States seceded unilaterally, but this did not change the initial logic of signing that treaty, namely the logic of the interconnection between offensive and defensive arms systems. The one cannot be separated from the other. If you create a threat to the other side -- and naturally the missile defense system is a threat to our deterrent potential -- then you are thereby creating the prerequisites for the other side to adopt countermeasures. Incidentally, these need not be too costly for Russia. The proposals contained in the president's statement do not yet envisage any additional expenditures on our side. It is a question of our devoting greater attention to those components of the armory that could neutralize the missile defense system. It means the development and commissioning of the radar that is being built in the territory of Kaliningrad Oblast and the stationing of the Iskander system, production of which is envisaged in any case. In addition, the creation of strike systems of ours, and correspondingly warheads, that would be less vulnerable to missile defense systems is possible. This is not so expensive, since the technologies have been undergoing development over at least the past 30 years, since Ronald Reagan announced the "Star Wars" plans. As you see, they were thinking about this quite a long time ago. Thus far, everything Medvedev mentioned would not lead to an increase in our real expenditures on the maintenance of the strategic potential.
In the future, the possibility of seceding from the START Treaty has also been announced. First, this is not yet a fait accompli. And second, in principle, "ceilings" are set in the START Treaty that we do not intend to reach in any case.
– But when will the point of no return be passed?
– To a certain extent it has already been passed. The United States is continuing the deployment of missile defense systems. It is impossible to imagine that Obama, or the next American president if Obama is not reelected, will abandon the missile defense system. The abandonment of this system is politically unacceptable, so the Americans will build it anyway. Therefore from this viewpoint the point of no return has been passed. But on the other hand one could say that it will never be passed, sinc e at any specific moment in time there will always be the possibility of continuing a dialogue on security issues, which will enable arms control to survive anyway.
– And could there be any progress after the NATO Summit in Chicago?
– I am not expecting any shifts in the Americans' position. Because the NATO summit will take place in the heat of the presidential election campaign anyway. Naturally no contender for the job in the White House will be able to say that the United States is going to abandon missile defense.
– Any treaty is a kind of system of compromises. What concessions is Russia willing to make in this story and what steps could America make to resolve the issue? Where is the point of equilibrium that suits both countries?
– On the US side the position is unequivocal: They do not want to make any compromises. This has already been stated repeatedly. The only thing they are offering us is to inform us of the flight codes of the missiles that they intend to deploy. That does not suit Russia. Moscow proposes dividing the sphere of sectoral responsibility for missile defense. But the Americans are refusing, justifying this on the grounds that Russia is not a NATO member. Therefore at the moment both positions remain extremely consistent.
There is a view that Russia should show flexibility. But why? Certain actions are being taken against Russia that Russia perceives as unfriendly or as threatening our security. What compromises should we make? And why should the compromises be only on our side? We are not siting missile defense components against the United States of America. Then, no doubt, it would be possible to talk about compromises of some kind.
– So what format would suit Russia, is there only the scenario of distribution of sectoral responsibility?
– Any scenario not involving the development of the missile defense system would suit Russia. The US arguments that the European missile defense system is needed to counter Iran's nuclear missile weapons are not convincing. It is laughable, because Iran simply has no weapon that could reach Europe, to say nothing of the United States of America. Incidentally, I would like to remind you that the final decision on the creation of the missile defense system was adopted after our clash with Georgia in South Ossetia.
– And when will we be ready for any concrete steps?
– These steps have been announced. The first of them, I think, will be the commissioning, most likely at the beginning of next year, of the radar station in Kaliningrad Oblast. And then the deployment of the Iskander system will follow.
Irina Omelchenko, Rossiyskaya Gazeta
