Reports that US President Barack Obama will overhaul a plan to build a missile defence shield in the Czech Republic and Poland would appear to represent a major foreign policy shift on Washington’s part, given that the shield was eagerly championed by the Bush administration. The official explanation for Obama’s shift is that Iran’s missiles aren’t sufficiently developed to merit the shield, and that the US will deploy a sea-based system in Europe. Yet many will find the reduced Iran threat argument weird logic, arguing that it is better to have a shield before the threat emerges.

Implications Of Obama’s Policy Shift

• Russia will be pleased, for it has aggressively opposed the construction of new US missile defence facilities in the Czech Republic and Poland, which it argued was aimed at reducing the effectiveness of its own missiles. However, missile defence is far from the only topic which divides Washington and Moscow. The two are competing for influence in the Caucasus, Caspian Basin, Central Asia, and elsewhere. Obama’s missile shift will set the scene for greater harmony, but it could also embolden Russia’s hardliners, who might perceive Obama to be weak. Indeed, Obama’s position is subject to change. The next US president, to be elected in 2012 or 2016, might choose to revive the missile plan. Thus, Moscow must prepare for that eventuality.

• Iran will also be pleased, since the shield was publicly aimed against their missile programmes. Like Moscow, Tehran might also see weakness on the US part. So too might Israel, which could conclude that the only way to reduce the Iranian threat is a direct attack on its nuclear facilities. That said, Israeli defence minister Ehud Barak was quoted as saying that Iran does not pose an existential threat to Israel.

• The Czech Republic and Poland will have mixed feelings. Their governments have supported the shield, but public sentiment has been opposed in the Czech Republic, but pro-shield in Poland. There will be elements in both countries that will interpret Obama’s position as signalling a reduced commitment to European defence.

• American conservatives will be unhappy. There are many who see the facilities in the Czech Republic and Poland as the first step in a much bigger missile shield that would be truly global in scope. They will accuse Obama of being soft on defence, of not taking the Iranian threat seriously, and of not adequately providing for the security of Europe and the US. It is difficult to predict the US domestic political implications, but the issue could feature in the 2010 mid-term elections.

Not The Last Word On Missile Defence
Whatever the praises or criticisms, Obama’s decision is unlikely to be the last word on missile defence. This issue will return in future presidencies. Moreover, as technologies advance, anti-missile defences are likely to become more ambitious in capabilities and scope.