Tweet
The West takes notice as Russia and Iran get closer
12:10 | 28/ 12/ 2007
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Goncharov) - The West
appears amazed to see Russian-Iranian strategic partnership surviving
and even strengthening.
This partnership is quite logical, but the West turned its attention to
it only with supplies of Russian long range surface-to-air S-300
missiles. Due to start in January, these supplies were agreed upon a
long time ago. Judging by the response of the media, the West is
panicky to see Russia stick to the promise.
The Guardian warns that modernized Russian air defense missile systems
can hit U.S. and Israeli war aircraft, and S-300 are even better than
Patriots at intercepting cruise missiles and IBM. But then, why would
Iran need such weapons? Will they come on friendly visits or what?
The New York Times regards the upcoming deal as another arbitrary
Russian step and reproaches President Bush for his tolerance as Russia
starts fuel exports to the Bushehr nuclear plant. The newspaper could
have regarded the fuel and missile supplies as an asymmetrical response
to the American ABM in Europe. The same logic could also apply to the
Kosovo issue.
Besides, the United States is also capable of arbitrary moves. In 2002,
it banged the door on the ABM Treaty without giving any thought to
Russia's reaction. Now, it is spreading its anti-missile defense to
Europe despite the problems it would cause for Russia and, for that
matter, to Europe if Russia hit back.
But then, why is Moscow to believe Washington that the European ABM
system is targeted at Iran and not Russia? Is the U.S. any better than
Iran, which is trying to convince the world that it will have no
nuclear weapons because they go against Muslim precepts?
With a recent shift of policy toward Iran, Russia is now determined to
comply with its pledges on the Iranian nuclear program, though within
limits set by the IAEA.
Whatever crisis may befall Iran, Russia stands to lose-for instance, if
the UN Security Council toughens its sanctions and the United States
and the European Union wind down partnership with Iran. The world went
through a similar situation when Russia did much to stop the isolation
of Iran.
No better to Russia would be a limited U.S. missile strike on Iran,
which would overthrow its president. Things would be downright
disastrous if America unleashed a total war. Russia would not gain,
either, with a secret U.S.-Iranian agreement-which appears the least
probable option of all. Russia would also lose if Iran obtained nuclear
arms. That would be a danger no smaller than the American ABM in
Europe.
There is only one wise thing Russia can do: join efforts with its
partners to settle the Iranian problem without radical measures. This
is what Moscow is trying to do now-suffice it to say that fuel supplies
to Bushehr have been coordinated with the White House.
Now, is it possible at all to settle the Iranian problem without acting
tough? Is Moscow ready to do so? And is Iran gambling on its contacts
with Russia? There are no clear answers to those burning questions, and
it is hard to say whether S-300s have any bearing on them. Be that as
it may, Russia will certainly bring its missiles to Iran.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not
necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.
12:10 | 28/ 12/ 2007
MOSCOW. (RIA Novosti political commentator Pyotr Goncharov) - The West
appears amazed to see Russian-Iranian strategic partnership surviving
and even strengthening.
This partnership is quite logical, but the West turned its attention to
it only with supplies of Russian long range surface-to-air S-300
missiles. Due to start in January, these supplies were agreed upon a
long time ago. Judging by the response of the media, the West is
panicky to see Russia stick to the promise.
The Guardian warns that modernized Russian air defense missile systems
can hit U.S. and Israeli war aircraft, and S-300 are even better than
Patriots at intercepting cruise missiles and IBM. But then, why would
Iran need such weapons? Will they come on friendly visits or what?
The New York Times regards the upcoming deal as another arbitrary
Russian step and reproaches President Bush for his tolerance as Russia
starts fuel exports to the Bushehr nuclear plant. The newspaper could
have regarded the fuel and missile supplies as an asymmetrical response
to the American ABM in Europe. The same logic could also apply to the
Kosovo issue.
Besides, the United States is also capable of arbitrary moves. In 2002,
it banged the door on the ABM Treaty without giving any thought to
Russia's reaction. Now, it is spreading its anti-missile defense to
Europe despite the problems it would cause for Russia and, for that
matter, to Europe if Russia hit back.
But then, why is Moscow to believe Washington that the European ABM
system is targeted at Iran and not Russia? Is the U.S. any better than
Iran, which is trying to convince the world that it will have no
nuclear weapons because they go against Muslim precepts?
With a recent shift of policy toward Iran, Russia is now determined to
comply with its pledges on the Iranian nuclear program, though within
limits set by the IAEA.
Whatever crisis may befall Iran, Russia stands to lose-for instance, if
the UN Security Council toughens its sanctions and the United States
and the European Union wind down partnership with Iran. The world went
through a similar situation when Russia did much to stop the isolation
of Iran.
No better to Russia would be a limited U.S. missile strike on Iran,
which would overthrow its president. Things would be downright
disastrous if America unleashed a total war. Russia would not gain,
either, with a secret U.S.-Iranian agreement-which appears the least
probable option of all. Russia would also lose if Iran obtained nuclear
arms. That would be a danger no smaller than the American ABM in
Europe.
There is only one wise thing Russia can do: join efforts with its
partners to settle the Iranian problem without radical measures. This
is what Moscow is trying to do now-suffice it to say that fuel supplies
to Bushehr have been coordinated with the White House.
Now, is it possible at all to settle the Iranian problem without acting
tough? Is Moscow ready to do so? And is Iran gambling on its contacts
with Russia? There are no clear answers to those burning questions, and
it is hard to say whether S-300s have any bearing on them. Be that as
it may, Russia will certainly bring its missiles to Iran.
The opinions expressed in this article are the author's and do not
necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.