Материал: Гольцева О.Ю. Международное право в официальных документах. Под ред. И.А. Горшеневой
316
How defence system works
The Americans are keen to bring their Missile Defence System to Eastern Europe. It is a complex and ever evolving web of interlinked weapons and radar based on land, sea, air and in space. I am enough of a die-hard science fiction fan to understand the thrill produced by talk of energy beams that can melt the metal casing of an enemy missile hundreds of miles away. But I am not enough of a military expert to understand why the principle of "knock'em out before they hit you" is considered quite so revolutionary. As I remarked to one expert, "It's hardly rocket science," before he pointed out that is exactly what it is.
NON-STATE ACTORS
But you can gather some of the complexity of the system when you consider that the Missile Defence Agency, which spends around £5bn a year, has on its website a list of acronyms for the systems involved that runs to 327 pages.
It is intended to protect the "United States, our troops abroad, our allies, and our friends" from the danger of nuclear or biological weapons being fired by states like North Korea or Iran or what the Americans call "non-state actors". There's quite a lot doubt which friends and allies will be allowed under this sheltering umbrella, and particularly how much of Europe will be included. But the main opponent of the plan is very much a traditional state actor.
An actor, in fact, fed up with being again cast as the villain of the piece. Russia has just fired a new rocket from just outside Moscow to a target around 3,000 miles away. In case anyone hasn't got the message, defence chiefs issued a statement saying this missile, capable of being packed with 10 warheads, would break through any missile defence scheme. If anyone was left scratching their head at what the hidden message was, President Putin helpfully added that "stuffing Europe with weapons" would turn it into a "powder keg".
317
GOVERNMENTS V PEOPLE
The Polish government is not so much daunted as enthused by the Russians' ire. In fact it's keen on getting not only the new missiles but even more than the Americans are willing to provide. Perhaps not surprisingly, in view of their history, the Poles are more worried about Russia than Iran, which they've made clear they don't see as much of a threat. In return for housing 10 "delivery systems" on its soil, Poland wants some old-fashioned Patriot missiles, which are rather good at dealing with incoming fire from places much near home, like, say, Russia.
Some Polish politicians, including senior members of the ruling coalition, say there should be a referendum before anything like this happens. But there won't be, not least because the Polish people are nowhere near so keen on the idea as their government.
In the Czech Republic there is similar enthusiasm from the government and similar demands for a referendum, this time from the social democratic opposition. With about 68% against in opinion polls, the Czech people aren't likely to get much of a say either. More problematic is the opposition of the Greens, who are part of the government coalition. At the moment it's difficult to see how the Czech Parliament would vote for the American plan.
VILLAGE VOICES
The United States wants to move and upgrade a microwave radar system from its current home on the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site on a Pacific Island to a new home about 40 miles outside Prague. Preparations are already underway at a military area, which was once a Nazi base, then a concentration camp, before becoming home to Soviet troops. Locals aren't keen on any more foreign military personnel in their neck of the woods, although many stress they are not anti-American.
Several villages have held referendums. In Trokavec it was 71 against, one for. In nearby Skorice it was 164 to
318
one. These votes have no legal power but considerable political clout. The villagers say they are worried about the effects of X-band radiation as well as Russian retaliation. The Americans reply that X-band is just a fancy name for the sort of thing used in airport security systems and the ones on the Pacific atolls have been operating near two schools with no ill effect. When the snows come to Europe, I will feel duty bound to travel to the Pacific to investigate.
STICKING OUT
Perhaps oddly, it's not the environmental or safety factors that alarm the Czech Green Party. Their vicechairman and foreign affairs expert, Ondrej Lisko, told me that it was the USA's failure to consult the people or involve Nato or the European Union that alarmed him. "The public diplomacy has been a complete fiasco. It's just playing with security, because in the 21st Century security has to be anchored in structures and alliances. The US should know by now that unilateralism has proved coun- ter-productive".
The leader of the Czech Social Democrats in the European Parliament, Libor Roucek, agrees. "Look at the risks and the dangers and it's clear we should do it together. There's a danger if we do this bilaterally, just the Czech Republic and the USA. We can't have two standards of protection in Europe".
President Bush may not find it too difficult to give Nato a greater role, although he might not like getting the European Union involved. But there are many in Poland and the Czech Republic who don't want their countries to risk the retaliation of Russia by sticking out alone. If it was missiles they were worried about, then it's hard to see how they could have any better or bigger friend than the States. But when it comes to a war of words they seem to want to know the rest of Europe is right behind them.
319
Exercise 16. Read the article. Do you remember what these acronyms mean: IAEA; NPT?
Washington (CNN) – Turkey's prime minister declined to support President Barack Obama's push for tough new sanctions against Iran but said his country was willing to act as a mediator in the diplomatic standoff over Tehran's nuclear ambitions.
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Turkey has had a strategic alliance with Iran since the 17th century and wants a diplomatic solution to end the deadlock. Erdogan spoke to CNN's Christiane Amanpour while in Washington to attend the Obama administration's summit on nuclear security, saying, "I believe that we can find a way out."
"I am here for a diplomatic solution," he said. Countries that are members of the International Atomic Energy Agency and the 1968 Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) "must all work together on this, and as (for) Turkey, we could act as a very important intermediary."
Turkey is a rotating member of the United Nations Security Council, which has demanded that Iran halt its nuclear fuel program. Iran has refused the demand and continued to produce enriched uranium, which in high concentrations can be used to produce a nuclear bomb.
Iran insists its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, but the United States has accused it of trying to develop a nuclear bomb.
The IAEA – the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency – reported in February that Iran has begun enriching uranium to higher levels without necessary safeguards, and the agency has said it has been unable to rule out the existence of an Iranian nuclear weapons program without further cooperation from Tehran.
While declining to endorse the idea of new sanctions against Tehran, Erdogan also said Ankara does not want to see any nuclear weapons in the Middle East. He noted that Israel, which does not recognize the NPT and is believed to have nuclear weapons, remains a member of the IAEA.
320
Exercise 17. Match the expressions as they occur in the text.
1. |
push |
a) |
the deadlock |
2. |
to act |
b) |
enriched uranium |
3. |
diplomatic |
c) |
member |
4. |
nuclear |
d) |
the demand |
5. |
a diplomatic |
e) |
solution |
6. |
to end |
f) |
purposes |
7. |
a rotating |
g) |
ambitions |
8. |
refused |
h) |
stand |
9. |
to produce |
i) |
watchdog agency |
10. peaceful |
j) |
as a mediator |
|
11. nuclear |
k) |
for new sanctions |
|
Exercise 18. Use these expressions above to summarize the information of the article.
OVER TO YOU
Compare the words of two famous political figures. Make your conclusions in the form of an essay.
“It is not just for a few states to sit and veto global approvals”. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Presidant of Iran.
“Every nation has to be either with us, or against us”. Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State.
Exercise 19. Debate the following questions. Use the chart below to help you.
1.Is it a duty of any country to take part in the nuclear proliferation?
2.Can a country be made to reduce its nuclear heads?
3.What do you know about the so-called “rogue countries”, as, e.g., Iran? Do all countries have right to have nuclear weapons? Why? Why not?
4.Do you think Iran should be made to close its nuclear program?