The project was initiated to serve in the fight against terrorism on the global level, based on the concern that one day unknown hands could acquire nuclear weapons, threatening America's allies. When this explanation didn't satisfy many, the project's defenders pointed to Iran and North Korea as the probable instigators of a future missile attack.It is not easy to be sure that Iran would want to hit European territory with missiles, but it is not necessary to minimize the dimensions of international terrorism. Whatever the US's real intentions were, Russia has declared that it perceives the initiative as an antagonist action, especially when the US has declared that it will seek to install some components of this system in Poland and the Czech Republic. Moscow promptly announced that it would retaliate by installing supplementary missiles in Kaliningrad, which is a Russian enclave surrounded by EU territory. In brief, the disagreement became noticeable. This did not mean that these two countries would fight with each other but that they perceived each other as rivals. This state of affairs was suitable for Bush policies, too. However, Obama policies seek to develop cooperation with Russia by settling differences, so the US has to earn this country's confidence instead of threatening it.
Russia wants the US to put aside its plans of installing missiles in Europe as a confidence-building measure. The US administration doesn't need to offend countries that have already accepted the system's implementation in their territories or to lose one of the crucial parts of the missile defense system. But Russia reiterates its protests and tries to make things difficult for the US in other areas by not helping the country.
One of the solutions may be to relocate the project instead of canceling it. That would mean that the system's main principle remains unchanged, while proving that Russia is not designated a target. That could comfort Russia, and in exchange, it can support US efforts elsewhere, for example, in Afghanistan. However, if the relocation of the system is envisaged, a new problem arises: finding a new location.
The Polish media recently claimed that Turkey or Israel could host the system. If Israel is chosen, that will provoke Iran so much that a serious war risk will appear on the horizon. It is not known if the US intends to push Iran to commit the error of attacking Israel, but if this happens, the consequences will be uncontrollable. That is why Israel is a very risky choice, especially at a time when the US tries to ease tensions around Israel. On the other hand, installing the system in Turkey would threaten Russia more than having the system in Poland or the Czech Republic because it will be perceived as a move limiting Russia's influence in the Black Sea, Caucasus and Central Asian regions. That would seriously damage relations between Russia and Turkey and also create tension between Ankara and Washington at a time when Turkey, through its energy policy, wants to contribute to the normalization of the US-Russia relationship.
Maybe these media reports' real purpose is to make countries reveal their reactions and to demonstrate that Israel and Turkey cannot adhere to such a system. Maybe these also prove that some people in Poland are extremely disturbed by the possibility that Poland may not be a top priority for the US.
