THE SUMMER OF 2009

Peter Huessy

It is early February 2009. The new American administration is seeking to repair America’s “image” in the world and adopt a more conciliatory and multilateral foreign and defense policy.

As part of its efforts, it eliminates funds in the 2009 Defense Authorization bill for the joint US-Czech and Polish missile and radar deployments, reportedly in return for a private understanding with the government of Vladimir Putin that Russia promises to “behave” re: it’s near abroad. As a result, the governments in Warsaw and Prague suffer no-confidence votes in their respective Parliaments. The opposition announces it will adopt a more accommodating relationship with Moscow if elected including no support for any additional memberships in NATO and an end to any notions about deploying "unworkable missile defenses."

Next,a “temporary freeze” is ordered on financial and military assistance to Israel. The administration reiterates its total commitment to withdraw from Iraq in no more than 16 months, and couples this with plans for a further drawdown in US forces in the Gulf Region. When asked whether the actions by the US government are in response to “preconditions” established by Iran, the administration says it is important to ‘listen to all viewpoints” and “reach out” and initiate “direct diplomacy” with Iran.

Additional defense spending rescissions are proposed in the administration’s revamped defense budget including billions cut from missile defense, future combat systems and related space systems. ABL and Navy-based Aegis missile defense deployments are cut with the explanation by the new Vice President that such deployments are “provocative, untested and unnecessary”.

Nuclear spending for the Trident and Minuteman forces are put on hold “pending review of nuclear issues” according to the White House. Administration officials speaking on background also suggest that further US forces should be withdrawn from the Republic of Korea to “pave the way for” and facilitate direct negotiations with North Korea so as to undermine Pyongyang’s charge that the US maintains a “hostile policy”.

By early spring, Congress has begun the process of putting together the defense spending bill for the following fiscal year and revamping the bill passed just before the beginning of the fiscal year in October. The administration's defense cuts have been approved. The additional force levels promised last year for the Marines and the Army has been abandoned because of “unprecedented fiscal problems”. Recapitulation of the forces is postponed with the explanation that it is “an issue for the second term”.

In mid-summer, in large part in reaction to the new American administration’s more "nuanced” US foreign policy, Benjamin Netanyahu is elected as the new Prime Minister of Israel. He has promised to eliminate Iran’s nuclear weapons programs. Just days after the vote, Tehran responds with the launch of three new ballistic missiles, identified by US and allied intelligence as a three-stage variant of the Shahab-3. The new “baby bottle” design will accommodate a nuclear warhead and apparently has a range in excess of 2400 kilometers, capable of reaching throughout the Middle East and most of Europe, particularly US forces in the region. The rocket tests, says Iran, are a demonstration that "we can wipe Israel off the map". At the same time, Hezbollah threatens to launch coordinated missile strikes against Israel aimed at toppling the newly elected Israeli government, while Syria threatens to simultaneously move into the Golan Heights.

The following week a plebiscite in Crimea results in an apparent overwhelming vote to join Russia and split from Ukraine. To prevent a response from the government in Kiev, Russian threatens to move military forces across the straits of Kersch, and parachute special-forces into the Crimea to “protect the interests of ethnic Russian people” and prevent their “alleged mistreatment”. Russian Naval ships armed with surface to surface missiles blockade the port of Sevastopol as a “precaution”.

The new US administration’s State Department spokesman declares the “unfortunate incidents” the obvious result of “past years of diplomatic failures” by the previous administration. Comment from the White House further notes “one could not expect such failures to be corrected in just our first few months”. The National Security Adviser says “real change takes time”.

At an emergency meeting of NATO members, a resolution passes postponing any consideration of new NATO membership until a “more appropriate time” and “in keeping in the spirit of multilateral cooperation” with Russia. Israel is also condemned for its “intimidating and aggressive” policy with respect to Iran’s nuclear programs, a charge echoed the next day at a UN Security Council meeting called by China and Russia to “eliminate pressures” from "hyper powers". The new UN Ambassador declares the US ready and willing to work with the Security Council in putting together a “more balanced world order” that “understands the real grievances of oppressed people” and does so through “peaceful means” and the absence of unilateral super power “bullying”.

###

Peter R. Huessy is currently the president of GeoStrategic Analysis, a defense and national security consulting business. In addition to writing for OpinionEditorials.com, he is also a guest lecturer, appearing at such fine institutions as the School of Advanced International Affairs, Johns Hopkins University, The Institute of World Politics, and The National War College. Mr. Huessy has spent his career working in government organizations and committees, such as the United Nations, The Environmental Fund, Department of the Interior, and the National Defense University Foundation.

geostrategicanalysis@comcast.net