Blog

Conservatives absolutely love European missile defense. Why? My theory is that it brings them to a happy place, one full of stuffed dolls of Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev and plastic Millennium Falcons. Yup, the European missile defense program was a vestige of the Cold War, when conservatives’ grip on national security strategy was tightest. Why else would the Bush administration have worked so hard to ensure that we had invested so much in the system that it’d be dang near impossible to back away?

So you’ll forgive them if they’re not exactly ready to give it up. Take House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-VA), for example:

The Administration’s misguided action will cause our eastern European allies to question our commitment to their people and security, while heightening concerns in Israel. The European deployment is the only system that can protect both the U.S. and Europe against the common threat of an Iran armed with nuclear weapons and the capability to deliver them.

Doesn’t that sound more like 1989 than 2009? Yet Cantor’s statement is just the latest example of how out-of-touch Republicans are with America’s national security needs in the 21st century.

I know it can be counter-intuitive to claim that we’re making America stronger by removing a missile shield. At first glance, it doesn’t make obvious sense.

But it’s true: we’re actually improving our missile defense capabilities. Instead of the land-based, costly, behind-schedule, outmoded system in Europe, the Obama administration is set to emphasize a more accurate, cheaper, near-term, next wave sea-based system. When comparing the two, think of the choice this way:

If you were going to buy a security system for your house, would you rather spend $1000 on a system that catches 50 percent of the criminals and doesn’t start working until next year, or one that costs $800, catches 80 percent, and starts working next week?

The choice seems easy, right? Though greatly simplified, it isn’t terribly different from the obvious choice the White House just made upon the unanimous recommendation from the Defense establishment.

Diplomatically, the choice is also a win-win for a stronger American security. The conservative cabal doesn’t think so, excessively worrying about upsetting our Eastern European allies while groveling to Russia. Here’s House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-OH):

“Scrapping the US missile defense system in Poland and the Czech Republic does little more than empower Russia and Iran at the expense of our allies in Europe,”

Or does it? While it’s true that there may be some bruised egos in Warsaw and Prague, our relationships with our Eastern European allies are steadfast. How can I be so confident? Look no further that the NATO Treaty’s Article 5, which states that an attack on any one NATO member is an attack on all. That’s the very same article that NATO invoked in the wake of 9/11.

Even better, guess who’s a member of NATO? If you said Poland and the Czech Republic, then DING DING, Vanna has some lovely gifts for you.

Furthermore, moving missile defense to a sea-based element removes an unnecessary thorn in the side of US-Russia relations, one that endears Russia to our efforts when negotiating with Iran. Russia’s help isn’t guaranteed, but if it’s possible to generate Russian pressure on Iran while deploying a technically better missile defense system, then it’s a no-brainer.

Just like this entire situation: Conservatives need to wake up to the fact that the Cold War is over and America’s national security needs in 2009 are very different from just twenty years ago.

Crossposted from AllOurMight.com