President Obama Signals to Russia Missile Defense Shield Can Vanish If Iran Doesn’t Get Nukes
EmailAn administration official tells ABC News that in Moscow sometime on or around February 11, Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs William Burns delivered a letter from President Obama to Russian President Dmitri Medvedev that addressed the missile defense program and Iran’s push for nuclear weapons.
Specifically, President Obama conveyed that the U.S. would be willing to scrap plans for a missile defense system, which the Russian government has long opposed, if Russia works with the U.S. to discourage Iran from building nuclear weapons.
"The letter addressed a broad range of issues including the issue of missile defense as it relates to Iran," the official tells ABC News. "The missile defense deployment is in response to an Iranian threat. If the Iranian threat is removed there is no longer a need for the deployment of the Missile defense system."
The letter was first reported by the New York Times.
The official insisted that the letter did not offer a "deal" or "quid pro quo," but was rather a simple statement of fact: "if they can help us, cooperate with us, to eliminate that threat from Iran," there will be no need to build the missile defense system. "It was a statement that reflects the reality that missile defense is a response to the Iranian threat."
The U.S. has been planning to build in the Czech Republic a high-tech radar to detect missiles, with 10 interceptor missiles to be deployed in Poland. Russia had proposed deploying missiles in its Kaliningrad exclave as retaliation.
But shortly after President Obama was elected, Russian leaders began sending signals that they were eager to end the stand-off.
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said, "We hope that the new leadership of the United States will be more constructive, and will help us come to a mutually acceptable solution," adding that the plan for missiles in Kaliningrad would "disappear" if the US dropped its plans. At the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Peru, Medvedev said there were "chances" for a resolution to the conflict, and that "dialogue is possible … A change of position is possible."
Burns last month was quoted saying that the US and Russia "share our common interest in ensuring that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapons capability, a nuclear weapons potential. If through strong diplomacy with Russia and our other partners we can reduce or eliminate that threat, it obviously shapes the way at which we look at missile defense. And we are also open to the possibility of cooperation with Russia, with our NATO partners on new missile defense configurations which can take advantage of assets that each of us has."
And Defense Secretary Robert Gates said during a NATO meeting in Poland that he’d "told the Russians a year ago that if there were no Iranian missile program, there would be no need for the missile sites…My hope is that now, with the new administration, the prospects for that kind of cooperation might have improved"
Medvedev on Sunday according to the state news agency, RIA Novostiat, said “We have received signals from our American colleagues. I expect those signals will turn into specific proposals. I hope to discuss the issue, which is extremely important for Europe, with President Barack Obama.”
Obama and Medvedev will meet for the first time in London on April 2.
– jpt
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
This is nothing if not a long overdue recognition that Russia indeed plays a huge role in middle eastern and south asian politics. What was Iraq if not a stanch against Russo-Iranian influence?
Posted by: vinman | March 3, 2009, 11:48 am 11:48 am
Oh God, Obama spoke. I bet the markets are down as the result.
If he would just keep his piehole closed….
Everytime he opens it the markets go down. He does not know how to fix the economy. He does know how to make it worse. That’s a fact based on his history!
He needs to just resign. He can view it as the patriotic thing to do.
Posted by: Down Again | March 3, 2009, 12:09 pm 12:09 pm
I hope a more constructive relationship with Russia occurs without our national interest being substantially harmed.
Posted by: Brett Ferguson | March 3, 2009, 12:13 pm 12:13 pm
Concerned in OH:”Why was that part left out of the quote? Because it shows how weak our enemies view 0bama?”
Right. Because Bush was having such fabulous success with our enemies – from Iran, to North Korea, to the depth of Putin’s soul…
Posted by: jhw539 | March 3, 2009, 12:14 pm 12:14 pm
“Oh God, Obama spoke. I bet the markets are down as the result.
If he would just keep his piehole closed….
“Everytime he opens it the markets go down. He does not know how to fix the economy. He does know how to make it worse. That’s a fact based on his history!
He needs to just resign. He can view it as the patriotic thing to do.”
…
This guy keeps reposting this same post on all the comment boards, but each time he is wrong. He thinks the market was great before Obama came to office.
Posted by: reason | March 3, 2009, 12:18 pm 12:18 pm
Instead of Obama trying to face Iran head on, he tries to kiss Russia’s Ass to get them to do it for him.
What a panzy.
He is showing Weakness to the WRONG PEOPLE.
Posted by: ajax | March 3, 2009, 12:20 pm 12:20 pm
reason:”This guy keeps reposting this same post on all the comment boards, but each time he is wrong. He thinks the market was great before Obama came to office.”
If he believed his spin, he could make a pretty profit.
Posted by: jhw539 | March 3, 2009, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm
As far as I was concerned, the only reason to threaten to put missile defense into eastern Europe was to leverage the Russians into cooperating on Iran’s nukes. Looks like it may be working.
Obama wouldn’t be in a position to take bows on this if Bush hadn’t first been so hardnosed and intransigent. Sort of like withdrawing from Iraq with a victory instead of a defeat.
Posted by: Bridget | March 3, 2009, 12:24 pm 12:24 pm
ajax:”He is showing Weakness to the WRONG PEOPLE.”
Obama is doing classic diplomacy – putting Russia on the spot to put up or shut up. He’s not whimsically musing about seeing into Putin’s soul. That hardline KGB strongman probably is still laughing at what a sucker Bush was.
Posted by: jhw539 | March 3, 2009, 12:25 pm 12:25 pm
Russia to O-DUMB-AH..HA HA HA HA HA HA We do what we want and u do what we want
Posted by: bawlknee phwank | March 3, 2009, 12:34 pm 12:34 pm
With the “new engagement of starting with a New Leader to digest the best sources now…We should be able to show Russia, that we are out for the long haul…To preserve life” to open doors for exchange without creating a war, without trying to be the bearer of wrongs…This must begin with a wathcful eye…because in Europe…wars seem to be about interest and control…and we get involved to have a piece of the pie…We once wanted to have peaceful countries and open exchange within those countries for all…but as long as we have “King of the Hill” going on, we will never be able to relinguish our old sef services that brought us to the anger of the Europeon peole! apachecheynne
Posted by: Apachecheynne | March 3, 2009, 12:40 pm 12:40 pm
A little less than a year before President Obama reportedly sent a secret letter to Russian President Dmitri A. Medvedev, offering to forgo an anti-missile shield if Russia would help prevent Iran from building long-range missiles and nuclear warheads, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) pushed the same idea to his predecessor.
At the White House in the spring of 2008, Schumer personally urged President Bush and Vice President Cheney to pursue such a deal, spokesman Brian Fallon said. He was rebuffed.
Schumer followed the meeting with an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in June 2008, laying out the case for such an arrangement.
“[W]e should tell Mr. Putin we will cease building the ineffective antinuclear missile defense sites in Eastern Europe in return for him joining the boycott,” Schumer wrote.
“It is our best hope to avoid a nuclear Iran, because a successful economic boycott would certainly force the Iranian regime to heed Western demands more than anything attempted so far.”
Posted by: O. | March 3, 2009, 12:50 pm 12:50 pm
Did not vote for Bush the second time around. I did not like the way he spent Money like a drunk Liberal. Especially did not like him the last couple years for jumping in bed with Nancy and Harry, (whoa… arggg, what a vision) and at the last, passing this stupid TARP BILL (that more Dems voted for WITH BUSH, then Republicans).
But, Bush never said he would talk to IRAN. Obama did. But, instead of getting tough with Iran, he sends a SECRET (thought he was going to be an OPEN President) letter to Russia trying to get them do it for him in exchange for not building a missle system that he does not support and sees it as costing to much. Plus, do you really think that if Russia was to take the deal, that Iran would not build 1 anyway?
Deal with Russia on the Missle system.
Deal with Iran on the Nuke they are building.
I wonder what the Pres. of Iran is thinking of the entire thing, after all that “I will talk to Iran” crap Obama spouted in the Campaign?
Posted by: ajax | March 3, 2009, 12:52 pm 12:52 pm
Would anyone allow a nurse to do brain surgery ??The Mesiah can’t. His “high skills” and “qualities” don’t even match the wolves out there.He is weak, too much rethoric and no substance and like his Vice Pres said “he will be tested in no time” There you have have it. Not even his Vice gives a little credit.Take that dems, a slap on the face square on the jaw by the Russians. Love the “Change “….LMAO
Posted by: Frank | March 3, 2009, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm
I bet the Russians will take the deal if we throw in Ukraine.
Don’t laugh – it’s probably being discussed!
Posted by: Byronius | March 3, 2009, 12:59 pm 12:59 pm
This is the most idiotic and juvenile national security proposal I think I’ve ever seen. The Ballistic Missile Defense System isn’t ONLY designed to help protect Europe from Iranian missiles, it is also designed to protect AMERICAN from NORTH KOREAN missiles, as well as Japan from North Korean and Chinese missiles.
Please tell me Obama isn’t going to scrap the whole system for an unmeasurable gain in Iran? It’s something Russia has ALREADY been trying to help us with. Russia has NO INTEREST WHATSOEVER in Iran getting a Nuclear missile. Russia has muslim problems in the South that Iran supports, i.e. Chechnya! You think Russia wants Iran to have nukes???? This is insane.
This is a freaking disaster.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 1:21 pm 1:21 pm
A missle defense system will guard against threats as yet unknown.
Posted by: mad | March 3, 2009, 1:35 pm 1:35 pm
I find it a little astonishing too. I fully functional ballistic missile defense system could, in the long term, render ballistic nuclear attack obsolete. Heck I’m for developing it with the Russians if we have to. I find it hard to believe the “world peace” crowd are against a system that would take away the 15 minutes to world obliteration scenario.
Did they abandon that principle because Russia doesn’t want us to develop it, so they can continue to hold their ballistic nuclear fleet over the heads of their neighbors?
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm
Are we no longer concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear missiles?
Posted by: MayBee | March 3, 2009, 1:57 pm 1:57 pm
“Are we no longer concerned about Pakistan’s nuclear missiles?”
Considering they are teetering on internal collapse, we should be.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 2:12 pm 2:12 pm
There is so much spin about this letter that it’s unlikely that we will know what the Prez said till 2080.
Nice, or not so nice, try, Barack, but now kwepie doll. Can’t give out cigars anymore, it’s the Ca thing.
Posted by: larry278 | March 3, 2009, 2:18 pm 2:18 pm
Interesting reading the childish right wing hysterics. That kind of crap is indefensible on both sides, but this forum seems to have attracted quite a few from the right wing.
As a Senator, Obama worked with Republican’s Lugar and Nunn to pass the Lugar-Nunn threat reduction bill.
The President knows Russia, understands more than most the problem with dissolving empires with nuclear weapons. Obama has surrounded himself with people who are knowledgeable, listens to them as Gates said over the weekend and is taking action.
What a disgrace that people read a story and look for/make up anything negative possible vs. having a thoughtful debate.
Posted by: Ranger | March 3, 2009, 2:46 pm 2:46 pm
As a Senator, Obama worked with Republican’s Lugar and Nunn to pass the Lugar-Nunn threat reduction bill.
Correction – Lugar-Obama Bill – There is also a Lugar-Nunn Bill.
Posted by: Ranger | March 3, 2009, 2:47 pm 2:47 pm
Why was this headlined as a “secret letter” with ABC news? There was nothing logical about the headline given that the contents were in the media.
Speaking of logic, working towards defusing Iran isn’t the same as ignoring Pakistan, which clearly isn’t the case.
Posted by: kat the real one | March 3, 2009, 2:50 pm 2:50 pm
This is not the first time an “administration official,” sometimes named, sometimes not, has stated Obama did, is doing or plans to do something only to have it later denied or drastically amended.
While it may be intentionally “flying a baloon” to see how it’s received, each statement-followed-by-denial erodes confidence in Obama’s presidency a little bit more.
Posted by: MizFW | March 3, 2009, 3:00 pm 3:00 pm
“Why was this headlined as a “secret letter” with ABC news? There was nothing logical about the headline given that the contents were in the media.”
I think they refer to the letter being sent back on Feb. 11th. The letter going out without anyone knowing, thus secret at the time. Now only acknowledging it after the NYT run an article. My guess anyway to their logic.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 3:04 pm 3:04 pm
I think they refer to the letter being sent back on Feb. 11th. The letter going out without anyone knowing, thus secret at the time.
********************************************
So then are all letters sent to foreign countries from the WH considered to be secret if it’s not announced to the media that they’ve been sent? I’ve never heard of WH correspondence not made public as “secret.” Furthermore, it’s an ironic allegation to make after all the secrecy and malfeasance of the Bush administration.
Posted by: kat the real one | March 3, 2009, 3:24 pm 3:24 pm
“Interesting reading the childish right wing hysterics.”
Ok we’ll keep it simple.
Russia has a problem with Chechnya rebels, who are muslim. Iran has professed support to Chechnyan rebels, which poses a diplomatic problem for Russia, but also affirms their desire to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons. They already have a stance on this because of their Chechnya problem. Thats not hysterics, it’s facts.
The BMD program is something Russia cannot afford to develop. They tried but scrapped their attempts in 1990. Their ballistic missile fleet is the largest in the world, costs tons of money to keep up, and is their major influence chip in the big game. If Europe adopts a missile shield, their hegemony power is diminished greatly. They have a determined interest in the BMD program not being in Europe. Again, not hysterics, its facts.
For BMD to be most effective, it needs to be dispersed, like a network similar to the internet, interlinked and mutually supporting. The more places it is, the more effective it is at intercepting ballistic missiles. Thus our push, for our own defense, to have more nations employ the system. So fact, the BMD system benefits us and our allies. Russia does not consider us an ally, still a strategic competitor, so they do not want us or our allies to have it.
Thus, we are at a diplomatic and strategic impasse with Russia.
What Obama has done is offer up the scrapping of the program and package it into something Russia already wants, thus we get no gain in the deal, only a loss. Not a good idea for our strategic position in the world.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 3:26 pm 3:26 pm
“I’ve never heard of WH correspondence not made public as “secret.”
I don’t really know kat, don’t disagree with your really. I think the content of the letter sparked off some interest in the media because it has some controversial content. Media do what media do. I think they made the assumption, because it contained controversial content, they tried to hide it from the public.
In terms of national security, that’s actually important to maintain that secrecy. It could be that the Russians released it to the press to show Obamas hand. Could be a diplomatic maneuver. Who knows.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 3:30 pm 3:30 pm
“Interesting reading the childish right wing hysterics.”
Ok we’ll keep it simple.
I had not bunched you in with that crew of posters, but it’s quite telling that you did.
Posted by: Ranger | March 3, 2009, 4:13 pm 4:13 pm
UPDATE:
AP: Obama on Tuesday denied offering Russia a deal in which Washington would slow deployment of a missile defense shield in Europe in exchange for Moscow’s help in a nuclear stand-off with Iran.
Posted by: Peach | March 3, 2009, 4:22 pm 4:22 pm
So Russia basically makes fun of Obama and completely blows him off, and what does Obama do? Says he never offered a missile deal to Russia.
Posted by: Peach | March 3, 2009, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
“I had not bunched you in with that crew of posters, but it’s quite telling that you did.”
Doh, my apologies. I had assumed wrongly. I try my best to stay as level as possible in these discussions. I do have passionate feelings when it comes to national defense though so, out of the posts I had below, I wasn’t sure if I had gone over the line. Again, my apologies.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 4:23 pm 4:23 pm
The truth vs Peach’s bs
“The report that was in The New York Times didn’t accurately characterize the letter,” Obama said after meeting British Prime Minister Gordon Brown for talks at the White House.
“What I said in the letter is what I have said publicly, which is that the missile defence that we have talked about deploying is directed towards, not Russia, but Iran,” he said.
“And what I said … was that, obviously, to the extent that we are lessening Iran’s commitment to nuclear weapons, then that reduces the pressure for, or the need for a missile defence system.”
Posted by: Ryan C | March 3, 2009, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm
“”if they can help us, cooperate with us, to eliminate that threat from Iran,” there will be no need to build the missile defense system.”
Ok now I’m confused. That statement right there sounds like a carefully veiled offer. Also I think it is a false assumption to think Russia was not working with us to eliminate that threat from Iran. Both the Bush Administration and Putin put forth an economic incentive package for Iran that included refineries and Light Water Nuke power plants that Iran refused. They want plants with weapons grade material. So I’m not sure what they hoped to gain with that whole statement.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 4:28 pm 4:28 pm
The Russian side
“If the new (U.S.) administration shows common sense and offers a new (missile defence) structure which would satisfy European (needs) … and would be acceptable for us, we are ready to discuss it,” Medvedev said on Tuesday.
“If we are talking about any ‘swaps’ (Iran for missile defence) this is not how the question is being put. This would not be productive,” he told a news conference in Madrid, where he was on a state visit.
Medvedev’s comments signalled possible flexibility by Moscow on an issue that contributed to a sharp deterioration in ties between Russia and the United States under former U.S. President George W. Bush and then-Russian President Vladimir Put
Posted by: Ryan C | March 3, 2009, 4:29 pm 4:29 pm
“Your solution seems to be to take a dump on said doorstep(by pushing ahead with BMD sites in former bloc nations) and dare the Russians to react.”
No, I said it would be stupid to scrap the program on a handshake on Russian cooperation, something we already have. That would be a huge mistake.
“Pulling the BMD back from say Poland while getting Russian cooperation with Iran is a good deal.”
Again, Russia already has a HUGE, MUCH LARGER vested interested in Iran not getting nukes than we do. Iran supports Chechnya, they don’t need any incentive more than that. So it’s a horrible deal. Did you fully read my posts below?
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
“If the new (U.S.) administration shows common sense and offers a new (missile defence) structure which would satisfy European (needs) … and would be acceptable for us, we are ready to discuss it,” Medvedev said on Tuesday.
In other words, deploy it where we say you can deploy it. Keep it out of countries we formally occupied and brutalized for 50 years, even if they want it.
I’m a fan of the BMD program. Anything that can deter the 15 minute destruction scenario is a good thing. In fact, I think we should develop a system with Russia and make nuclear ballistic missile attack obsolete. I just don’t think Russia wants that leveling power to happen with their inability to modernize.
Posted by: KR | March 3, 2009, 4:47 pm 4:47 pm
A year & a half back or so The US National Intelligence Report said that Iran was not that close to a bomb (almost implying that Iran really was not that much of a threat). Many thought that this was just ‘Political Appeasement’ to the world and Liberals in general (this report was independent & President Bush has no control over it). Even the IAEA thought it was Pollyannaish.
Much of the world accepted it, though, as some sort of Absolute Truth (a report a few months ago said much of the world had backed off pressuring Iran because of it — and many Liberals applauded it as just what they wanted to hear — other evidence be damned)
Now, some new evidence says they have enough for one bomb and maybe more (and even more in a few months). Have Liberals ever heard of “Erring on the Side of Caution’. Lets see if Obum has the ‘Experience’ to Know what to do !!!
If Not, Israel probably will………..
Posted by: Da truth | March 3, 2009, 5:04 pm 5:04 pm
I think Our Current Government does not have a clue as to what is going on in this world, or on the home front. I don’t think they know what the next step could possibly be to solve any of our problems. I FEAR THEY DON’T HAVE A CLUE
Posted by: jeanette | March 3, 2009, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
Why on earth is obama allowed to run free? He does not have a clue as to what he is doing nor the danger he imposes to the US.
Posted by: Flash | March 3, 2009, 5:47 pm 5:47 pm
Cutting deals behind someone else’s back is about par for the course. Trying to pull a crooked deal with the Russians, eh, Mr Obama? Well I guess thats the only way he can ‘negotiate’ since he’s a crook and a liar himself. Where’s the honesty and integrity, Mr Obama, or do you know what that means?
Posted by: branningon | March 3, 2009, 5:54 pm 5:54 pm
Let the Europeans enjoy the full flavor of Muscovite tyranny and Bolshevism under Putin’s iron fist.
It’s about time that the Europeans see to their own defense. They are so superior to us lowly Americans, I’m sure they’d be better off.
Posted by: RR GOP | March 3, 2009, 6:45 pm 6:45 pm
Real progress.I have been waiting for a President who undresatands the new realities of the world.
President Barack Obama is that kind of guy.Talking to the russians makes sense and i hope we will see new and positive steps in this direction.
We need peace and security in the world.
Posted by: stclair ward | March 3, 2009, 9:39 pm 9:39 pm
HEY can we all get along,we need food for starving people around the world,not freaking nukes.
W E NEED BREAD NOT BOMBS OK.
Posted by: stclair ward | March 3, 2009, 9:43 pm 9:43 pm
The Russians don’t want a missle system that can not only keep track of Russian missles but also to be able to knock them out of the sky. The old saying goes (What you do not know want hurt you) If we do not place the early warning in place we are opening the fron door and bad door to our long time friend (read RUSSIA) hello anyone at home when it comes to our so call friends. The current President better wae up and smell the coffee unles he wants to learn Russian or Iranian.
Posted by: Ken | March 3, 2009, 10:18 pm 10:18 pm
So basically the empty suit is begging Russia to do his work with Iran? Yea, i’m sure Russia would really have America’s best interest in mind.
Posted by: Obama The Marxist | March 4, 2009, 2:02 am 2:02 am