> Nuclear Chicken in Poland
> Putin Can't Afford to Back Down
>
> By Mike Whitney
>
>                                            "Don't blame the mirror if your
> face is crooked." Vladimir Putin quoting Russian proverb
>
> 24/08/08 "ICH" -- -  If the Bush administration proceeds with its plan to
> deploy its Missile Defense System in Poland, Russian Prime Minister Putin
> will be forced to remove it militarily. He has no other option. The proposed
> system integrates the the entire US nuclear arsenal into one
> operational-unit a mere 115 miles from the Russian border. It's no different
> than Khrushchev's plan to deploy nuclear missiles in Cuba in the 1960s.
>
>   Early last year, at a press conference that was censored in the United
> States, Putin explained his concerns about Bush's plan:
>
>   "Once the missile defense system is put in place it will work
> automatically with the entire nuclear capability of the United States. It
> will be an integral part of the US nuclear capability....And, for the first
> time in history---and I want to emphasize this---there will be elements of
> the US nuclear capability on the European continent. It simply changes the
> whole configuration of international security...Of course, we have to
> respond to that."
>
> Nuclear weapons specialist, Francis A. Boyle, says the Bush administration's
> plans represent the  "longstanding US policy of nuclear first-strike against
> Russia." In Boyle's article "US Missiles in Europe: Beyond Deterrence to
> First Strike Threat" he states:
>
> "By means of a US first strike about 99%%+ of Russian nuclear forces would be
> taken out. Namely, the United States Government believes that with the
> deployment of a facially successful first strike capability, they can move
> beyond deterrence and into "compellence.". This has been analyzed ad nauseam
> in the professional literature. But especially by one of Harvard's premier
> warmongers in chief, Thomas Schelling --winner of the Nobel Prize in
> Economics granted by the Bank of Sweden-- who developed the term
> "compellence" and distinguished it from "deterrence." .The USG is breaking
> out of a "deterrence" posture and moving into a "compellence" posture.
> (Global Research 6-6-07)
>
>   Bush's real goal is to force Moscow to conform to Washington's diktats or
> face the prospect of first-strike nuclear annihilation. Putin must respond.
>
>    Putin needs to present his case before the UN General Assembly
> emphasizing how the proposed US system upsets the nuclear balance of power
> and poses a direct threat to Russia's national security. He should give an
> account of US activities in Central Asia since the fall of the Berlin Wall
> showing how the Bush administration has pursued a hostile policy of
> encirclement and strangulation towards the Russian Federation. The US has
> brought most of the former Soviet satellites into NATO, including Poland,
> Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and now is seeking membership for Georgia and
> Ukraine right on Russia's border.
>
> The US has expanded its military installations in other areas of Central
> Asia, primarily Afghanistan, posing long-range problems for the entire
> region.
>
> The Bush administration has also used its intelligence agencies and NGOs to
> foment political unrest and topple regimes which were sympathetic to Moscow
> in its "color-coded" revolutions. Eurasia is now inundated with American
> puppets who get their marching-orders from the White House.
>
> Also, the US and its allies have declared Kosovo, a vital part of Serbian
> territory, independent without UN approval. Serbia is a traditional ally of
> Russia's. Many analysts now believe that the recent fighting in South
> Ossetia was directly connected to the Bush administration's blatant
> disregard for Serbia's sovereignty.
>
> Putin recently responded to these developments saying:
>
>  "Some people have the illusion that you can do everything just as you want,
> regardless of the interests of other people. Of course it is for precisely
> this reason that the international situation gets worse and eventually
> results in an arms race. But we are not the instigators. We do not want it.
> Why would we want to divert resources to this? And we are not jeopardizing
> our relations with anyone. But we must respond. Name even one step that we
> have taken or one action of ours designed to worsen the situation. There are
> none. We are not interested in that. We are interested in maintaining a good
> atmosphere." Putin added exasperated, "So what should we do?" The present
> situation has brought us "the brink of disaster!"
>
>   Russia has complied with its treaty obligations and removed all of its
> heavy weapons from the Eastern Europe and put them behind the Ural
> Mountains. They have reduced their military by 300,000.
>
>  At the same time Washington has increased its arms shipments to new allies
> in Eastern Europe and is building two new military bases in Romania and
> Bulgaria. Missile Defense components and radar are going up in the Czech
> Republic and Poland. Obviously, Russia cannot continue to disarm
> unilaterally while neighboring states bulk up with new US-made weapons
> systems.
>
> When Putin heard that the Bush administration was developing
> "bunker-busting" nuclear weapons he said to Bush:
>
>  "It would be better to look for other ways to fight terrorism than create
> low-yield nuclear weapons that lower the threshold for using these weapons,
> and thereby put humankind on the brink of nuclear catastrophe. But they don't
> listen to us. They are not looking for compromise. Their entire point of
> view can be summed-up in one sentence: 'Whoever is not with us is against
> us.'"
>
> It wasn't Russia who scrapped the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty (ABM) That
> was the Bush administration, too.
>
> American expansionism has thrust the world into another arms race pitting
> East against West Cold War-style. The present system of international
> security has been upended and we are moving inexorably towards a military
> showdown between the two nuclear-armed powers.
>
>   As Putin stated at the press conference, "I am convinced that we have
> reached that decisive moment when we must seriously think about the
> architecture of global security."
>
> Indeed.
>
> Russia is experiencing a Renaissance. 20 million people have been raised
> from poverty since Putin took office 8 years ago. The Russian economy has
> been growing by 7%% a year, real incomes are growing by an astonishing 12%%
> per year and Moscow has become a thriving center of global trade. Oil and
> natural gas have restored Russia to its formal role as one of the great
> world's great powers. The last thing Putin wants is a nuclear standoff with
> the United States. But he will not shirk from his responsibilities either.
> If the Missile Defense system is deployed, Putin will be forced to raise the
> stakes and send warplanes over the construction site. That is the logical
> first-step that any responsible leader would take before removing the site
> altogether.
>
> Bush should consider very carefully whether he wants to go ahead with this
> game of nuclear chicken or not. Putting a knife to Moscow's throat is an act
> of aggression equal to invading Iraq, only this time the victim has the
> ability to fight back.