Missiles in the Eastern Europe

The US says it needs missiles to protect Europe against nukes from Iran. That's partly true, but the missile base could go in any number of countries. Russia says its nuclear deterrent is threatened by a European missile shield. That's partly true, but the number of anti-missile missiles can be limited by treaty to less than a dozen, so that they would not offer any realistic defence against Russia's thousands of warheads.

So what's this all about?

It's about Russia's sphere of influence. Russia notes correctly that the more secure its former vassals are against the prospect of a military strike, the more independent they become. In fact Russia's foreign policy is dependent on intimidation. It is to the US/Europe's advantage for those countries to feel militarily secure, thus the desire to place military bases in their territory. It is one thing to briefly invade a NATO country. It is quite another to kill American soldiers.

So what kind of base should we put there? Air Force? Tanks? A small missile defence is the least threatening option.

An analogy might be if your neighbor two doors down is inimidating your neighbor next door. It is right to stand up to him to make her feel secure. But you should consider carefully before helping the guy who lives above his garage (like maybe Belarus) especially if there is a familial relationship.

The hard part is how to handle borderline cases, like Georgia and Ukraine. They are fragile democracies, and have a right to self determination, but there is that familial relationship. Russia's strategy now is likely to be to try to repeat in Crimea what they did in Abkhazia and South Ossetia. We should make it clear that if they take Crimea, they lose the rest of Ukraine.