Poland has announced that they intend to allow similar U.S. deployment of PAC-3 interceptor missiles, and a contingent of American troops to operate them, in their country by April. In addition SM-3 interceptors, now only deployed on-board U.S. Navy Aegis destroyers, will also be sent to Poland. They will be stationed just 35 miles from the Russian border. Imagine if Russia was deploying similar systems in Canada or Mexico. Would you not call this a provocation?
The U.S. still claims they are to protect from non-existent nuclear missiles from far-away Iran but the truth is the PAC-3 systems will be aimed at Russian nuclear missiles.
UPI reports, "A revised plan by the current U.S. administration includes the deployment of a new anti-missile system in Poland and the neighboring Czech Republic in 2015. But last month Romania announced that it, too, would be the site of 20 missile interceptors and Bulgaria has expressed interest in hosting a base."
In addition the U.S. is using its NATO military arm to step-up war games aimed at Russia. In the coming weeks NATO warplanes will conduct exercises in the Baltic Sea region over Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. All three nations border Russia's mainland or its Kaliningrad territory.
What message is the U.S. and NATO sending Russia?
Indian journalist M K Bhadrakumar has written that NATO's post-Cold War drive to the east began in the Balkans and has proceeded inexorably to the Black Sea, the Caucasus, Central Asia and Afghanistan. It has also turned the Baltic Sea into a U.S. and Alliance lake, with Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Sweden within the Western military phalanx - all have troops in Afghanistan under NATO command - and Russia is essentially surrounded.
Russia is being encircled because they have the world's largest supply of natural gas and because they insist on being part of the process that determines how Caspian Sea oil and natural gas are delivered via pipelines in their backyard. The U.S. though has its own agenda, largely written by the American and British oil corporations who ultimately direct U.S. foreign policy decision-making these days.
In response Russia is expanding their offensive military capability. They are also likely to pull back at some level from the nuclear weapons reduction talks with Obama. How could it be in their interest to reduce their retaliatory capability at a time when the U.S. surrounding them with so-called missile defense systems? We know that missile defense is actually an arm of the U.S. first-strike system - the shield to be used after the first-strike sword has been fired.
These aggressive moves by the Obama administration are consistent with the Bush imperial program of U.S. and NATO global military expansion to control the declining resources around the world. Sadly there are still some in the "peace movement" who give Obama a pass for doing the very same things, that just a couple of years ago, they vehemently criticized Bush for doing.