President Obama’ s decision to revise the Bush administration’ s plan for missile defense in Europe has been greeted with anxiety and alarm in the Czech Republic and Poland.
The fear in these countries, and elsewhere in Central Europe, is that the strategic relationship with the United States is being marginalized, and that relations with Russia are being “ reset” at the region’ s expense.
Part of the problem is that rhetorically at least, the Bush administration seemed to make the strategic partnership with the Czech Republic and Poland synonymous with placement of missile defense radars and interceptors on Czech and Poland soil respectively.
As a result, even though placement of this hardware met with some public opposition in both countries (in the Czech Republic more than in Poland), backing away from the system’ s implementation is interpreted broadly as a diminution of the strategic relationship.
Deployment of a Patriot battery in Poland, irrespective of what happens with missile defense, will provide some reassurance. But the over-reliance on “ hardware” on Central European soil as “ proof” of a high strategic partnership was a negative trend the Obama administration inherited.
Now’ s the time to clarify the definition of partnership between our countries.
President Obama began to do this in his statement, in which he made clear that regardless of the merits of the missile defense system, the administration endorses a closer strategic relationship between the United States and the Czech Republic and Poland, consistent with the historical friendship binding our countries together, and given shared challenges.
Poland and the Czech Republic have joined the United States through NATO in Afghanistan (without restrictions as to where they can deploy), and in the spring the Poles increased their commitment by 300 troops.
While security collaboration between our countries is a core underpinning of NATO’ s article 5 commitment to mutual defense, there are ways beyond hard security for our countries to work together that can create a more diversified and thus healthier strategic relationship.
Here are some steps that the U.S. could take:
Form a partnership with Poland to spearhead banking and financial stability in the region. In the early 1990s, the Balcerowicz program provided a model of economic reform and privatization that had lessons relevant for the rest of post-Communist Central Europe.
Today Poland is one of a few countries whose economies still have positive growth. That Polish banking and finance is sound is itself a source of regional stability.
But some steps taken to strengthen the fundamentals of the Polish economy have region-wide relevance. The United States and Poland can set up a bilateral working group (similar to the U.S.-Japan Working Group established earlier this decade) to identify steps to strengthen economies in the region that took on too much debt and ran out of money to pay it off.
Supporting Ukraine. Ukraine’ s presidential elections are scheduled for January. These elections may divide the country between east and west (abetted perhaps by outside forces). This division could be accelerated by the financial crisis, since the crisis impacts eastern Ukraine disproportionately — that is where the steel plants are located.
The United States and the countries of Central Europe should continue high-level engagement with Ukraine. Poland as an immediate neighbor of Ukraine and as a member of the European Union can facilitate Kiev’ s Western integration.
In particular, the United States can endorse and provide support for the E.U. Eastern Partnership Project, which Poland and Sweden have pioneered to bolster the Union’ s ties with eastern neighbors, with a view to putting a least some on the path to E.U. membership. American backing would give this relationship constructive meaning.
Support for investment in renewable energy. Now is the time for international collaboration and coordination on the renewable research agenda, and the Czech Republic and Poland have an excellent tradition in chemistry and the sciences.
The United States should discuss with the Czechs and the Poles the possibility of merging efforts on biofuels or the development of cellulosic ethanol.
After the first oil crisis in the 1970s, the International Energy Agency took steps toward coordinating U.S.-European-Japanese energy policies. It’ s time to build on that foundation. Merging efforts and resources may well be welcomed by the rest of Europe.
Visa waiver/visa fee. Poland was excluded from a group of newcomers (that included the Czech Republic) to the Visa Waiver Program last October. The law requires that less than 10 percent of the visa applications by a country be rejected before it qualifies for membership.
It will take time for Poland to make the 10 percent requirement (they’ re now at 14 percent), but a cheap and highly symbolic gesture to the Poles would be to waive the visa application fee — currently a non-refundable $100 even for those rejected — for at least Polish students and scholars traveling to the United States.
President Obama’ s decision on missile defense gives Washington more options, and militarily is more consistent with the threats we face. Since joining NATO in 1997, the Czech Republic and Poland have become key American partners in meeting security challenges.
Now’ s the time to build on these relationships — not only to address current friction, but to advance mutual self-interest.
