|
Romania: U.S. Missile Shield, Navy In The Black Sea?
|
rwro-@yahoo.com
|
Nov 04, 2009 09:28 PST
|
http://www.thediplomat.ro/articol.php?id=3D554
The Diplomat (Romania)
November, 2009
Missile threat shifts to Black Sea
How can America=E2=80=99s anti-ballistic missile architecture expand into t=
he land and waters of the Black Sea region? Michael Bird reports
-US defence secretary Robert Gates has also stated that candidate countries=
for a land-based defence system of standard missile-3 (SM-3) could be in e=
astern Europe. So far only the Czech Republic and Poland are officially on =
the shortlist, while Gates has also floated the idea of a radar system in t=
he Caucasus....Romania is a better strategic location than the Czech Republ=
ic and Poland because it is closer to the site of potential threats from th=
e south and the east.=20
-=E2=80=9CA strong and modern surveillance system located in Romania, Bulga=
ria and Turkey could monitor three hot areas at once: the Black Sea, the Ca=
ucasus and the Caspian and relevant zones in the Middle East.=E2=80=9D=20
-This would make Greece, Bulgaria or Romania contenders - and with Biden ma=
king the recent visit to Bucharest as opposed to Sofia or Athens in the con=
text of discussions on security architecture, Romania appears to be a more =
likely location.=20
=20
=20
The transformation of America=E2=80=99s security architecture for eastern E=
urope has thrown Romania into the spotlight as a key strategic location for=
defence against the threat of medium-range ballistic missiles.=20
US vice president Joe Biden made the first moves into this direction when, =
on a recent visit to Bucharest, he welcomed Romania=E2=80=99s =E2=80=9Cembr=
ace=E2=80=9D of the new US proposals for combating short and medium range a=
irborne weaponry.=20
But it was unclear whether this could translate into Romania hosting either=
a land-based anti-missile defence system or whether the Black Sea itself c=
ould support US or US-allied ships....
In Bucharest last month, Biden again highlighted the danger of missiles to =
US=E2=80=99s European allies. =E2=80=9CThis technology, coupled with the sp=
read of nuclear know-how, poses a great threat to all of us,=E2=80=9D he ar=
gued.=20
US defence secretary Robert Gates has also stated that candidate countries =
for a land-based defence system of standard missile-3 (SM-3) could be in ea=
stern Europe. So far only the Czech Republic and Poland are officially on t=
he shortlist, while Gates has also floated the idea of a radar system in th=
e Caucasus.=20
=E2=80=9CRomania would be able to give political and popular support for su=
ch a scheme,=E2=80=9D says Chifu. =E2=80=9CIt is pro-American among both th=
e people and the Government of any colour.=E2=80=9D=20
Romania is a better strategic location than the Czech Republic and Poland b=
ecause it is closer to the site of potential threats from the south and the=
east.=20
=E2=80=9CRomania and Bulgaria are more vulnerable from the point of view of=
a weak military equipment of their national armies,=E2=80=9D says Radu Tud=
or, military analyst and Jane=E2=80=99s Defence correspondent for Romania. =
=E2=80=9CA strong and modern surveillance system located in Romania, Bulgar=
ia and Turkey could monitor three hot areas at once: the Black Sea, the Cau=
casus and the Caspian and relevant zones in the Middle East.=E2=80=9D=20
There are competing missile defence systems in place and planned. The east =
Mediterranean has its own defence architecture, with Israel=E2=80=99s Arrow=
system of interceptor missiles.=20
While NATO has a long-term plan in missile-defence for the southeast Europe=
an region, this is still at the draft stage and is waiting for the confirma=
tion of the US plan.=20
Meanwhile Turkey is also buying a billion-dollar radar and missile system f=
rom the USA, with its purchase of the air defence system Patriot Advanced C=
apability-3. Last October the US invited Turkey to join the new missile shi=
eld, but Turkey is very unlikely to host a land-based SM-3 system, because =
it would not dare position itself so aggressively against its Iranian neigh=
bour.=20
This would make Greece, Bulgaria or Romania contenders - and with Biden mak=
ing the recent visit to Bucharest as opposed to Sofia or Athens in the cont=
ext of discussions on security architecture, Romania appears to be a more l=
ikely location.=20
But one analyst argues that the reason Biden does not want to make more of =
a public commitment to Romania as a host country at this stage is because t=
he nation is locked in a Presidential campaign. Such a statement could impl=
y a tacit approval from Washington for Basescu=E2=80=99s re-election. This =
is not a re-appointment that the US opposes - Basescu has been a strong, al=
most over-enthusiastic, ally of America - but the USA will not want to be s=
een as interfering.=20
....
Naval moves=20
By 2011 the Pentagon will roll out its naval anti-ballistic missile system =
on cruisers and destroyers in the eastern Mediterranean. These ships will b=
e equipped with Lockheed Martin=E2=80=99s Aegis system, containing anti-air=
craft and anti-missile radar and weaponry. The ships contain the mid to lon=
g range SM=E2=80=933 missiles.=20
But could these vessels also be extended to the Black Sea, taking into acco=
unt the zone is in the range of the potential threat? Romania and Bulgaria =
offer the best potential locations for a marine base.=20
The Constanta port and naval facilities, plus Bulgaria with its Burgas port=
, could be good platforms for a military naval base, argues Radu Tudor. If =
the US wants to use naval facilities in Romania, Ioan Mircea Pascu, MEP and=
ex-Romanian Minister of National Defence, argues it should not consider bu=
ilding new facilities, but modernise existing ones for its cruisers and des=
troyers.=20
But most analysts argue that it would be impossible for the US to use its B=
lack Sea allies as a location for naval defence without an overhaul of exis=
ting maritime agreements, because the US could be seen as intruding on Russ=
ia=E2=80=99s waters.=20
A major obstacle to US presence in the Black Sea is the 1936 Montreux Conve=
ntion, a Soviet-era agreement giving Turkey control over the Bosphorus and =
Dardanelles Straits.=20
It states that warships of non-Black Sea powers may not remain in the Black=
Sea longer than 21 days and prevents aircraft carriers from moving through=
the straits.=20
In 73 years Turkey has allowed some exceptions, but the principle remains i=
n place. By limiting the Black Sea to naval vessels of the sea=E2=80=99s bo=
rder states, the agreement gives Russians de facto control over the maritim=
e area and Turkey administration over its own straits. The US=E2=80=99s pre=
sence in the Black Sea is still being tested. Most recently America was res=
tricted from sending humanitarian aid by ship to Georgia during its conflic=
t with Russia in 2008.=20
=E2=80=9CSince August 2008 Russia has become an unpredictable actor and eve=
n ostentatious in manifesting its military aggression at the Black Sea,=E2=
=80=9D argues Tudor. =E2=80=9CI hope that the new American strategy will in=
clude not only the US direct interests but also an enhanced protection of t=
he NATO member states which have an exit to the Black Sea.=E2=80=9D=20
....
Using a tough approach, last July in Ukraine, Joe Biden said that the US wo=
uld not recognise the =E2=80=98Russian sphere of influence=E2=80=99 over ex=
-Soviet territories.=20
....
Additional reporting by Ana Maria Nitoi
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D
Stop NATO
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/stopnato
Blog site:
http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/
=20
To subscribe, send an e-mail to:
rwro-@yahoo.com
or
stopnato--@yahoogroups.com
Daily digest option available.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=0A=0A=0A
|
|
 |
|
