 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| . |  |
. |
BMD Focus: Euro-base blues -- Part 2
Washington (UPI) Nov 19, 2007 Following Rep. Ellen Tauscher's tough talk, it now looks more likely that the funds for the Polish interceptor base will be eliminated after all. And even the smaller cut proposed by the Senate for funding the Czech radar facility may be further reduced. The latest Democratic hardening against the administration on the issue reflected in the comments Nov. 8 of Tauscher, D-Calif., chair of the Strategic Forces Subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee, reflects the new Democratic general strategy to be more aggressive against President Bush on national security issues. The Democrats' standing in polls has taken a pounding because of their general perceived ineffectiveness, especially on the Iraq war where they have tabled 40 resolutions that failed to get pushed through into any effective legislation. Ironically, the Democrats in both houses of Congress have been cooperating fruitfully with the minority Republicans on most ballistic-missile defense funding issues, and Tauscher has been a leading and constructive figure in that process. Thanks to her efforts and those of some of her senior colleagues, an effective bipartisan consensus on developing the nation's main BMD programs has been operating through the first year of the 110th Congress and it looks likely to hold. But the issue of European bases for U.S. BMD assets remains a partisan football. Republican strategists believe they will continue to get mileage as long as the Democrats can be seen to drag their feet on that issue, or oppose it entirely. Democrats, however, believe they have to take a stronger line on those more peripheral elements of BMD they either oppose or remain uncertain about, as well as confronting the administration more energetically on Iraq. The twists and turns of the Democrats also reflect the nature of the U.S. Congress, which is significantly different from most other national parliaments in other democratic political systems. For in the United States, the executive branch is independent of the legislature in that it is not directly responsible to it. A majority vote of no confidence in either or both houses of Congress cannot bring down a president or his administration. A president can certainly be impeached as an extreme measure, but the cumbersome process has only been enacted twice in all of U.S. political history -- against President Andrew Johnson in 1868 and against President Clinton in 1998. Members of both the House and the Senate therefore usually advance in reputation and power by their legal abilities to craft and micromanage legislation, or negotiate compromises over it, rather than by boldly criticizing or opposing sitting presidents on key issues. Senators in particular are legendary for changing only slowly or gradually, even incrementally, in their stands on key issues of legislation. This is supposedly in line with their reputation for dignity and sagacity. In practice, however, it often makes them simply look out of touch and absurd. The new Democratic toughness against a BMD base in Poland at least has the merit of being more clearly defined. If Tauscher and other Democrats genuinely believe Iranian or other "rogue" states' missile threats that the base is meant to guard against are not real, or that the interceptor base, if built, would be of little if any use in preventing them, they have a case for opposing the program, because the risks it generates by infuriating Russia would not be worth it. But Russia is being infuriated anyway. The new Democratic position also has the merit of being more likely to produce a serious public debate on the issue that will carefully examine both the Iranian threat and assess the seriousness of Russian opposition to the BMD bases. However, the bottom line now is that the Republican administration and the Democratic Congress badly need to get their acts together on the issue. The dangers of alienating Russia, while simultaneously neglected potentially important anti-missile defense facilities against future threats, are both real. The White House and Capitol Hill need to quit playing political football and craft a joint policy on the issue -- and soon. Community Email This Article Comment On This Article Related Links Learn about missile defense at SpaceWar.com Learn about nuclear weapons doctrine and defense at SpaceWar.com All about missiles at SpaceWar.com Learn about the Superpowers of the 21st Century at SpaceWar.com
BMD Focus: Euro-base blues -- Part 1
Washington (UPI) Nov 16, 2007 The Bush administration and the U.S. Congress continue to stumble between the two worst possible worlds as they lock horns over the issue of putting a ballistic missile defense base in Poland. |
|
|
| The content herein, unless otherwise known to be public domain, are Copyright 1995-2006 - SpaceDaily.AFP and UPI Wire Stories are copyright Agence France-Presse and United Press International. ESA PortalReports are copyright European Space Agency. All NASA sourced material is public domain. Additionalcopyrights may apply in whole or part to other bona fide parties. Advertising does not imply endorsement,agreement or approval of any opinions, statements or information provided by SpaceDaily on any Web page published or hosted by SpaceDaily. Privacy Statement |
