In this post there are a couple of recent articles with comments and perspectives related to the opening of the missile defense facility in Redzikowo in Poland, the Russian response, and the relationship between Poland and Russia with excerpt from older statements by Vladimir Putin on the topic of the missile shield
The Wiki has under
Redzikowo
Aegis Ashore
See also:
United States missile defense complex in Poland
The governments of the United States and Poland approved the building and operation of an Aegis Ashore AN/SPY-1 system adjacent to the village. Delays added around four years to the construction process, stretching the start of operations into 2023.
Another system is at
Deveselu,
Romania, and has been operational since 2016.
They are part of the European Phased Adaptive Approach to regional missile defence against threats from Iran and includes
Aegis radar-capable ships based at
Rota, Spain, and
AN/TPY-2 radar in
Turkey (operational since 2011).
Naval Support Facility-Redzikowo was declared operational on 13 November 2024.
On the same day as the strike in Dnepropetrovsk, see this SOTT article:
Russia's New 'Experimental' Missile(s) Send a Message to NATO, there was this piece of news:
Russia reveals new priority strike target in Poland 21 Nov, 2024
The US missile defense base in Redzikowo increases the overall level of nuclear danger, according to Russia's Foreign Ministry
Russia has added the recently opened US missile defense base in Poland to its list of possible priority strike targets due to its "obvious potential" to weaken Moscow's deterrent forces, Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has said.
A few days earlier, there was:
Polish president admits real purpose of US missile base was not about defending against Iran, but expanding NATO towards Russia 13 Nov, 2024
The missile defense facility at Redzikowo isn't about intercepting ballistic missiles from Iran, but about moving Poland into the US zone of influence and away from Russia, Polish President Andrzej Duda has revealed.
The Aegis Ashore facility on the Baltic Sea coast was proposed in the early 2000s, after the US repudiated the anti-ballistic missile (ABM) treaty. Washington assured Moscow at the time that the future bases in Romania and Poland were not aimed against Russia but against "rogue states" such as Iran or North Korea.
Speaking at the opening ceremony for the Redzikowo base on Wednesday, Duda quoted the words of the Polish president at the time, Lech Kaczynski, revealing the real purpose of the missile base.
"Andrzej, these missiles will not defend Poland," Duda said. "They will actually protect areas far, far away from Poland from missiles that could potentially be launched from Iran, for example. But this will be an American missile base, which will contain some of the greatest secrets of the United States and which the United States will guard."
"And this is very important, because this American base will be built on our soil, in Poland," Duda continued, quoting his predecessor. "And from that moment, when this base stands here, the whole world will see clearly that this is no longer the Russian zone of influence. And from the Polish point of view, this is the most important thing strategically."
Speaking for himself, Duda said he was pleased that the US now had 10,000 troops in Poland and said American soldiers would always be welcome on his country's soil.
"If somewhere in the world someone is unhappy with having American soldiers and an American base, then come to us, we cordially invite you," the Polish president said. "We will always welcome you with joy."
Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski, who also spoke at the ceremony, said it was "not a coincidence" that Warsaw and Washington signed the deal for the base just days after the Russo-Georgian war of August 2008.
Polish Defense Minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz called the opening of the base "an extraordinary event in the history of the security of Poland" and further proof that Warsaw "is a good ally" of the US. He noted that Polish troops fought alongside the Americans in Afghanistan and Iraq, even before joining NATO.
Moscow has long maintained that Washington's claims about the purpose of Aegis bases were disingenuous, and that their real objective was to expand NATO infrastructure eastwards to contain Russia. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday that Russia will respond to the opening of Redzikowo by "adopting appropriate measures to ensure parity."
Related to the setting up of the missile shield, there was in the article,
Putin speaks: Video archives 1999-2024, this section:
Putin's question to the West: "How long can we put up with this? Eventually there will have to be a reaction." February 14, 2008
By the end of his second presidential term, Vladimir Putin's stance had solidified. He maintained that Russia should be a trustworthy and reliable partner, an open nation willing to collaborate with countries across the globe. However, he was no longer willing to ignore, what Moscow saw, as threats to national security posed by the West.
Increasingly, his speeches included warnings about the potential consequences of reckless policies pursued by the United States and its allies, highlighting their double standards. The West interpreted Moscow's reluctance to make further unilateral concessions as aggression, but Putin patiently tried to clarify that this was not the case.
This video contains excerpts from the following speeches by Vladimir Putin:
At the Press Conference, part of which is found in the video (after minute seven), and also in the transcript linked to above, there were questions from an American and a Polish journalist. Both posed questions related to security and the missile defence system:
Fox News Channel, Usa: My question concerns your words about retargeting nuclear missiles against Ukraine if Ukraine joins NATO or becomes part of the missile defence system. Condoleezza Rice called it yesterday deplorable and unacceptable rhetoric. Would you take back these words or comment on them?
[...]
Second, regarding the possibility of retargeting missiles, I will of course comment on this situation and I am grateful to you for raising this issue. We will not target our missiles against anyone unless there is the extreme need to do so.
Take a look at what kind of situation we are talking about.
I have no doubt that there are people among you today who would appeal to democracy, freedom and so on. Democracy is a universal concept and it cannot be local (that is, you cannot apply democratic principles in one place and forget about them entirely in another). If a country considers itself democratic it has to be democratic in every way, in every manifestation, both at home and on the international stage.
What is democracy? We all know that democracy is government by the people. Our American partners are looking to deploy elements of a missile defence system in Eastern Europe, a radar station in the Czech Republic, and interceptor missiles in Poland, and these plans look like they will indeed go ahead. But who asked the Czechs and the Poles if they actually want these systems on their soil? According to the information I have received, the vast majority of Czech citizens are not enthusiastic about these plans. Our General Staff and our experts think that this system represents a threat to our national security. If this system is established, we will be forced to make an appropriate response. In such a situation we probably would be forced to retarget our missiles against the sites that represent a threat. But it is not we who are creating these sites. We are asking that this not go ahead, but no one is listening. We are giving a clear warning right from the start that if you take this step this is the response you can expect from us. No one asked the Czechs’ opinion. It was simply decided to carry out these plans and that is that. Moreover, even NATO was not asked. Only after criticism came from Moscow did attempts begin to start coordinating this issue within NATO itself.
As for the situation in Ukraine, according to the information I have, the overwhelming majority of Ukrainians oppose joining NATO. But the Ukrainian leadership has nonetheless signed a certain document on starting the accession procedure. Is this democracy? Were the country’s citizens asked their opinion? But if this is the way things are being done, without anyone’s opinion being asked, then perhaps bases could also be established there in the future and missile defence system components deployed there. And what are we to do? In such a situation we would be obliged to target our missiles at these sites that we consider a threat to our national security. I think I have a duty to say this frankly and honestly today, so that no one in the future can try to offload the responsibility for such developments in events onto our heads. We do not want such developments in events. We are simply speaking honestly and clearly about the problems we see, that is all.
In the clip from the same video, there was also a question from Polish Television, which as it appears in the official transcript reads:
Polish Television: What will happen to relations between Russia and Poland if elements of the missile defence system are deployed in Poland? And a second question: many Poles are worried about Russia’s return to superpower status, given the historical experience. What can you do to assure Poles that a powerful Russia is not a threat to countries such as Poland?
Vladimir Putin: I do not think that we should heap ashes on our heads and turn to self-flagellation in an attempt to prove to all how good we are. Russia is not behaving aggressively and is not fixated on the difficult moments in the history of our bilateral relations. Russia thinks that we need to look to the future and draw on the positive pages in our relations, and this way we can expect success.
Concerning relations with Poland in particular, I would like to point out that we have not taken a single step aimed at creating difficulties in the relations between our countries. We have made no such moves. Yes, we decided to build a gas pipeline across the Baltic Sea. I do not understand how this could offend Poland. This is our gas and we want to sell it to our main consumers in Europe. We already built a gas transport system across Polish territory. We carried out this work together and we pay the transit fees on time and supply Poland with all necessary energy resources without any restrictions whatsoever. There have not been any interruptions. Indeed, in previous years, based on the take-or-pay principle, our Polish partners ended up taking less gas that what they had contracted for, and in principle, Gazprom had the right to impose penalties, but we did not do this and looked for other solutions to the situation. In other words, there have been no restrictions and we will not impose any restrictions in the future. But our position is that we need to diversify our supply routes for delivering energy resources to our main consumers. What is bad about this? Is there anything anti-Polish here? Why such a reaction? Where does it come from? To be honest, I was really quite surprised.
A comment to the gas trade, and the pipeline in the Baltic Sea, that Vladimir Putin mentioned in 2008, may be provided by statements from Angela Merkel in a recent interview:
23 Nov, 2024 01:02
Merkel blasts Ukraine and Poland over Russian gas
[...]
“Many important aspects are being forgotten today: for example, Ukraine and Poland were not fundamentally opposed to our import of Russian gas as long as it passed through their territory and they received transit fees for it,” she said.
Continuing with Putin's answer to Polish Television, which goes into quite some detail:
As for problems such as the meat imports issue, this is not a Russian-Polish issue. I discussed this with Mr Tusk [Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk] when he visited. This is more of an issue between Russia and Europe. The issue here is that agriculture in Eastern European countries receives large subsidies from European financial sources and produce is then dumped on the Russian market. This is stifling the development of our own agriculture sector. There are also some specific issues. For example, we are carrying out a national rural development programme and have been offering various incentives to the agriculture sector such as making loans available. Many agricultural producers have taken out these loans and now it is time to repay them, but to repay them they need to sell their produce and they cannot do so on the domestic market. We can either continue to toss accusations each other’s way or we can sit down at the negotiation table and sort out the issue, examine the motives behind our actions and take each other’s interests into account. In this sense, Poland could act as the conduit for our common interests in the European organisations. What we need to do is not trade accusations with Poland but join forces to protect our interests in the face of richer countries. We face a situation in which on the one hand we have the problem of subsidies and dumping of agricultural produce on our market, and on the other hand we see that the Polish authorities are not always managing to deal with the flows of smuggled goods coming in from Latin America and Asia, and we clearly have to respond somehow.
As I said, we need not to aggravate our relations but to look for solutions. I had a very constructive, businesslike and substantial dialogue with Mr Tusk and I hope that this will continue to be the case. As for the missile defence issue and so on, it seems to me that this issue is closely linked to economic concerns. I have the impression that someone is deliberately fanning an anti-Russian mood in order to create the moral and political climate for deploying these systems. If you stir up anti-Russian sentiment in Poland it will be easier to convince the public that they need some new weapons systems or other supposedly for their protection. In reality it is not clear where the threat is coming from. They say it is Iranian missiles that are the threat, but we all know that Iran has no such missiles.
I discussed this matter too with the Polish Prime Minister. If such systems are deployed on Polish territory or attempts are made to use them to neutralise our nuclear missile potential, this would upset the strategic balance in the world and would be a threat to our national security, and we would have no choice in such a situation but to take countermeasures, including possibly retargeting our offensive missile systems against the sites we consider to pose a threat.
We do not want to do this. Would this obstruct development of our relations in other areas? I do not think so in principle, but the level of security in Europe would be lower, of course. Frankly speaking, I do not understand why anyone needs this. No one is retargeting any missiles at the moment and we are all developing our relations. Yes, sometimes we have disputes, sometimes we argue, but then we cool down, get together again and begin tackling our common problems, and all without targeting any missiles against each other. Why change the situation for the worse?
I hope very much that we will have a constructive dialogue with our Polish colleagues and American partners on all of these issues and that we will be able to take each other’s concerns and interests into account.
There was little constructive dialogue. It is almost amazing how these statements from 2008 reflect what happens in 2024.
The Polish Government said they would welcome more US military presence, and they already have quite a bit.
Source for the image is the US embassy in Poland.
Vladimir Putin saw in 2008 the situation in Poland from a Russian perspective. For the sake of contrast, I will include a promotion for the US bases and military presence in Poland, as presented in a short video uploaded to YouTube by an NGO think-tank that calls itself
Warsaw Institute (YouTube channel,
Wiki) established in 2014 (!)
U.S. Permanent Military Base in Poland: Favorable Solution For the NATO Alliance
Is this video balanced, pro-Polish, pro something else ..., or cringeworthy?
These days, a documentary is airing on RT about the historical relations and conflicts between Poland and Russia.
A critic would say that such is Russian propaganda and not worth watching. I take a different approach, and ask if there is anything to learn?
Russia vs Poland. 1000-Year Duel. Part 1
2024, Europe, 18+
Authors: Tatiana Borsh
Poland currently stands as NATO's primary stronghold in the face of Russia. It boasts approximately 20 military sites, hosting NATO and US military personnel. The Polish people are told that the substantial military spending is due to the alleged threat posed by Russia.
Over centuries, these neighbouring nations become caught in confrontation, embroiling themselves in prolonged and harrowing wars. Throughout history, there have been moments where one country almost absorbed the other. In the 17th century, Polish forces seized Moscow, and Polish prince Władysław IV Vasa was even elected as a ruler of Russia. However, the course of history took a dramatic turn, leading to the late 18th-century partitioning of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth between Russia, Prussia, and Austria. This event marked Poland's loss of sovereignty for 123 years.
What underlies the animosity between Poland and Russia? Tune into this documentary for a comprehensive understanding of the historical roots that shape the modern relations between these two countries.
Russia vs Poland. 1000-Year Duel. Part 2
[...]
Hitler's invasion of Poland marked the start of World War II. Why did this happen and how did Europe descend into its darkest chapters? The documentary looks back at the origins of the First and Second World Wars and the interwar period. Where in Europe did the first concentration camps appear? How did Poland split into pro-Russian and pro-German factions during World War I? Why did Warsaw refuse to sign an anti-Nazi pact with Moscow? Historians suggest that this is the inevitable outcome of the thousand-year enmity between Poland and Russia. However,
the history of their relationship is more complex than it appears. What secrets does this challenging period in European history hold? Discover the answers in the new documentary.
Maybe it is not accessible in all countries due to restrictions, or available for a long time, but at least the short
promo seems to be downloadable.
On a side note, the above Tatiana Borsh is more than a
producer of documentaries (see her TG channel), she is also an active astrologer, see her
FB page. It is tempting to ask what the future holds for Poland, and the other US satellites and vassals? We don't know what the astrologer would say, but we know that much is decided by what people do in the present. For mature reflections, what went before can be helpful to keep in mind.
www.veed.io
