Cold War Re-do?

Americans are all surprised that the Russians are calling our plan to build an anti-missile shield along their eastern border a provocation. After all, say the Americans, we are just trying to protect ourselves from a sneak attack.

Or are we?

If the Russians are really going to attack us using missiles, the shortest distance would be over the Arctic Circle, not across Europe and the Atlantic Ocean. But that’s not where the missile-defense system is going.

And why would the Russians even use intercontinental ballistic missiles? They have the same sort of nuclear attack submarines filled with atomic weapons roaming the oceans as we do. If the Russians want to stage a sneak attack, which makes more sense to them —firing a rocket at a target 4,000 miles away, or 100 miles away?

And why would the Russians want to attack us? It’s been suggested that they want to get at our raw materials. But why would they need them? They have more oil and minerals than we do. Their problem is they lack the capital to exploit them. Blowing us up isn’t going to get them that. In fact, when you think about it, the most valuable resource America has is its people. What good are they if you incinerate them in an atomic fire ball? Nor do I see the threat of an attack being effective. Try imagining President Vladimir Putin saying, “Hand over your tool-and-die makers or we’ll blow you to Kingdom Come!”

Some say of the proposed anti-missile shield, “No, you’ve got it all wrong. It’s Europe we’re protecting.” In which case, shouldn’t Europe build it—and, more importantly, pay for it? If the Europeans aren’t worried about a Russian attack, and they know the Russians far better than we do, why should we interfere? And, considering the fact that right now their economy is a heck of a lot healthier than ours, I’m not keen on laying out several billion dollars or euros which the Europeans can more easily afford than we can.

Others say, “Hey, don’t you remember—the Russians are our enemies.” Apparently they don’t think so. In fact, they want to join NATO and become our ally. It’s the U.S. that’s blocking them. And when Venezuela several years ago held back crude oil deliveries, it was Russia that put more of its own crude oil production on the world market. That’s hardly the act of an enemy who would be overjoyed at seeing its rival pushed into economic turmoil.

And who is to say the Russians don’t already have an anti-anti-missile defense system ready to go? Although a lot of Americans have a vision of the Russians as a bunch of vodka-drinking, potato-eating peasants, they’re really quite clever. And their vodka isn’t bad, either.

Here’s a question: If the missile-defense system really doesn’t defend, what else could it be used for? Presumably, in addition to intercontinental ballistic rockets, it could also shoot down slower-moving objects in the sky like, well, airplanes. Would the U.S. shoot down a plane carrying a Russian leader it’s at odds with? “No, never. Americans don’t go around assassinating foreign leaders.” Yeah, right.

How can the system wind up hurting us more than the Russians? Suppose the Russians are in the market for, say, a thousand farm tractors. That’s a pretty good order. And we have companies like Caterpillar, John Deere, and International Harvester who would dearly love to get the contract. Wouldn’t this missile defense system make the Russians feel more kindly to overseas manufacturers like, say, Mercedes or Nissan? Be realistic. This project winds up potentially hurting corporate America and its workers and shareholders.

So why is the Bush Administration so keen on a military system that provides not an ounce of security, one that supposedly protects people on another continent who neither want nor are willing to pay for it? One that will cost the American taxpayers—that’s you and me—billions of dollars that could otherwise be spent on, oh, I don’t know, say, untangling the traffic mess, or hiring more policemen, or taking care of the thousands of returning wounded Iraqi War veterans? Oh, come on now, we all know the answer. I just want to hear a Bush supporter admit it.

Paul M. Troop is a retired political and business reporter and editor now living in Johns Creek. In addition to working for such newspapers as the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, his articles have been distributed worldwide by such news agencies as Reuters and the NANA syndicate. His biography appears in Who’s Who in America.