This is NOT WikiLeaks. It is just a briefing I prepared a long time ago. Almost two years after I handed in the following “Memo” to Prof. John Bailey from Georgetown University, Washington D.C., as a part of my final coursework, I publish it here. Now you can judge. Was my memorandum successful regarding the estimation of the evolvement of the situation?
Georgetown University, Washington DC, June 2009
Scenario Memorandum
Date, place: 8th July 2009, Prague, the Czech Republic
To: LTG O´Reily, Director of the Missile Defense Agency – U.S. Department of Defense
From: Lukas Musil, analyst of international relations for the region of Central Europe
Subject: The deployment of the U.S. XBR radar facility in the Czech territory
Summary: It is rather improbable that the U.S. will achieve positioning of the military base in the Czech Republic in the horizon of 4 years. The planned unilateral deployment of the U.S. antimissile shield - radar base in Brdy, would threaten the process of improving the relations between Russia and the U.S. and similarly would lead to deterioration of the relations with other key allies in the European continent. The positioning of the radar facility in Brdy is inconvenient for the current U.S. administration which looks for a dialogue. The Treaty about planned radar facility is improbable to be passed through the House of Deputies and Senate of the Czech Republic.
Key area of the policy:
· The consequences of the policy options taken by the U.S. and Czech side about the deployment of the U.S. anti-missile radar site in the Czech Republic
· Can the Missile Defence Agency still count with the Czech territory for its planned XBR Radar in Central Europe?
· The likelihood of the deployment
Time horizon: This memorandum is focused on the period from the summer 2009 until the autumn 2012. This is on the score of the new elections (presidential in the U.S. and Russia and to the House of Deputies in the Czech Republic) which will be held in 2012. The elections in 2012 can represent a milestone in the foreign policy of the key actors in the similar way as represented the elections of 2008 and 2009.
Background: In 1999 was approved by the U.S. Congress and signed by the President the National Missile Defense Act (Public Law 106-38). This law predestinates the direction of certain area of U.S. policy when mentioning: “It is the policy of the United States to deploy as soon as is technologically possible an effective National Missile Defense system capable of defending the territory of the United States against limited ballistic missile attack (whether accidental, unauthorized, or deliberate) with funding subject to the annual authorization of appropriations and the annual appropriation of funds for National Missile Defense.“ In other words, should this statement be fulfilled and the anti-missile shield could function effectively, it is necessary to deploy its facilities in different parts of the Earth´s surface. The U.S. has approached the Czech Republic because Central Europe is, according to experts from the Missile Defense Agency, an optimum location for the positioning of a missile defense facility (XBR radar) protecting the territory of the USA as well as the centre and northwest of the European continent against the possible attacks from the “Rough States“ (in this case Iran and Syria). Your agency has also enumerated that one of the best territories which would fulfilled the requirements for an effective missile shield and would protect the U.S. territory is, besides the Czech Republic, also the northern Poland, where the missiles should be deployed. At a particular level, the Czech Republic has been in talks about its involvement into the missile defense system following an official request made by the U.S. on 19th January 2007 as regards prospective location of the radar as an element of the U.S. missile defence on the Czech territory.
[1] The Czechs responded to the request for talks in a positive manner in a diplomatic note on 28th March 2007. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs confirmed that the Czech Republic decided to enter into negotiations with the United States on location of an anti-ballistic missile defense radar on its territory. U.S. military bases are supposed to be positioned in a very delicate part of European continent and that is why it whips up emotions in countries from France to Russia. The region of Central Europe has always been strategically very important
[2]. This was a well known fact to all the major empires in the past
[3] that tried to dominate Europe firstly via increasing its influence in Central Europe. The planned U.S anti-missile shield facilities in Poland and the Czech republic are primarily aimed against the „Rough states“, however it is obvious that such facilities perceive some European countries as threats for their own security. A case in point of such a country is Russia, nevertheless the members of the European Union – Germany and France are sometimes also mentioned.
The possible scenarios:
1) No U.S. radar base in the Czech Republic. (50% probability)
Decisive factor in this scenario is the Czech attitude. The U.S. will not deploy the XBR radar in the Czech territory due to the internal political situation in the Czech Republic and additionaly because of changing course in the U.S. foreign policy. The Czech side is reluctant and unsure about the future of radar facility. The treaty between the U.S. and the Czech Republic about the deployment of the U.S. military base in the western part of the Czech territory[4] was signed by the officials of both countries[5] on 8th July 2008, however the most important institution which will make the final decision, the Czech parliament, has not ratified the treaty till this date. The planned radar base has been since the same beginning perceived negatively by the majority of the Czech population (68 percent against[6]). The former Czech government of Prime Minister Topolanek did not listen to the voice of electorate and despite the public opinion was putting through the U.S. radar base. The government lost support in regional elections in November 2008 and finally lost the majority in the key institution, House of Deputies, which led to its end in April 2009. Topolanek´s Civic Democratic Party, as the only party in the Parliament supporting the U.S. radar facility, lost its majority in the Senate too. The elections for the House of Deputies are planned on the autumn 2009 and the probability that will win the Social Democratic Party, which is against the planned U.S. radar base, is high. In the particular case - deployment of a foreign military base in the Czech territory other big parties (Christian party, Communist party) will join the Social Democratic Party and will apparently obtain the majority in the House of Deputies voting against the U.S. radar base. Without the ratification of the treaty by at least 120 of 200 members of the House of Deputies (absolute majority) and absolute majority of physically present senators in the Senate, the radar base can not be built in the Czech territory. Another, partial option, is that after the elections in autumn 2009, the members of Parliament will enforce a public referendum, so as the Czech population could itself decide about the radar base. In this referendum, according to current surveys, almost 70 percent of the Czechs would vote against the U.S. radar base.
2) U.S. Radar base according the initial plan. (20% probability)
Providing the fact that the Czech parliament or public referendum will approve the treaty between U.S. and the Czech Republic then the U.S. will deploy the XBR radar according to the initial plans in the territory of the Czech Republic. This facility will protect the U.S. as well as a substantial part of the European territory. Moreover, U.S. increases its prestige and will become more powerful in Europe. The facility will be involved into the NATO structures. However, the involvement into the NATO structures will not tranquillize the U.S. rivals in the European continent who demand their own European defense system (France and Germany) and on the other hand obviously will constitute a threat for Russia. Russia´s revenge will represent deployment of its long or middle range missiles close to the borders with Poland, in Kaliningrad region. Apart from this, the decision of positioning the U.S. bases in Czech Republic would threaten the arrangements between Russia and U.S. about the decrease of strategic nuclear missiles[7] achieved on 6th July 2009. These events could lead to a scenario similar to the Cold War.
3) U.S. Radar facility in another country, out of the “Hot“ territory. (15% probability)
The course of U.S. foreign policy has moved to a different direction based on dialogue rather than monologue. Due to this new approach to rest of the significant actors of world´s politics, the U.S. will agree with the Russian proposal to deploy the radar and missile sites in a neutral and not conflictive territory. That policy would not jeopardize, in contrary to the second scenario, the interests of Russia. A proposal which talks about involving any other country in another region different to Central Europe has been advocated by the Russians since 2008, when President Medvedev claimed that U.S. should better use a former Russian missile base in neutral Azerbaijan, if the target for the U.S. really represent the proclaimed “Rough States“ Iran and Syria. It is improbable that U.S. will accept this proposal, as it would have significate to be subordinated to the will of Russia.
4) Closing the U.S. National Missile Defense program. (15% probability)
The current U.S. administration will stop its National Missile Defense program due to its apparent inefficiency and expensiveness and/or because of revaluation of priorities in foreign policy by President Obama´s Cabinet. The administration of president Obama has not yet clarified its attitude and has not decided about the future of the Missile Defense System, strongly supported by former president Bush. However, President Obama made a statement mentioning that the anti-missile shield defense program will not continue if proved to satisfaction that it does not function. Now, the administration waits for expertise reports, whether it is worth continuing the anti-missile shield program or whether to leave it. President Obama claims that once there is no threat from Iran or North Corea, no anti-missile shield is necessary. Despite this statement, the eventual U.S. military sites in Central Europe or anywhere in the World, as mentioned above, have its unexceptionable strategic importance aiming towards the increase of the presence and influence of the U.S. in Europe or in any other part of the World. Therefore, also due to this reason, the U.S. will be reluctant to leave its National Missile Defense program.
Sources
Books
1. Baylis John, Smith Steve. (Eds.) 2004. The Globalization of World Politics, An introduction to international relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
2. Waisová, Šárka. 2007. Atlas mezinárodních vztahů. Prostor a politika po skončení studené války. Atlas of the International relations. Politics after the Cold War. Plzeň: Vydavatelství a nakladatelství Aleš Čeněk. Internet
3. Anti-missile defense. July 6, 2009. www.protiraketovaobrana.cz
4. Anti-missile defense would threaten yesterday´s arrangements. Lavrov Sergei. July 7, 2009. http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/evropa/173131-lavrov-protiraketova-obrana-by-ohrozila-odzbrojovaci-dohody.html
5. Two thirds of Czechs against U.S. radar base – poll. April 15, 2009. http://www.ceskenoviny.cz/zpravy/proti-radaru-v-cr-se-vyslovily-dve-tretiny-lidi/371244?id=371281
6. U.S. Defense Missile Agency. July 2, 2009. http://www.mda.mil
[1] http://www.protiraketovaobrana.cz/obrana.asp?y=obrana/eng_1_mdandczr.htm¶m=6. July 6, 2009
[2] As the famous scholar, Karl Haushofer mentioned: “He who has under control Central Europe has under control also Russia. He who has under control Russia, has under control also the Euroasiatic continental mass. And he who has under his control the continental mass rules the World.“
[3] Napoleon´s France, Hitler´s Third Reich or Stalin´s Soviet Union
[4] Former military zone called Brdy, also used by the Soviet troops as the military baracks after the invasion of the countries of the Warsaw Pact to Checoslovakia in August 1968
[5] The U. S. represented the former Secretary of State, Condoleeza Rice, for the Czech side signed the minister of Foreign Affairs, Karel Schwarzenberg
[6] Two thirds of Czechs against U.S. radar base – poll. April 15, 2009. http://www.ceskenoviny.cz/zpravy/proti-radaru-v-cr-se-vyslovily-dve-tretiny-lidi/371244?id=371281
[7] Lavrov: Anti-missile defense would threaten yesterday´s arrangements. July 7, 2009. http://www.novinky.cz/zahranicni/evropa/173131-lavrov-protiraketova-obrana-by-ohrozila-odzbrojovaci-dohody.html
The “Eastern” bloc used to have its Trabant, in the “West” you travelled in VW Beetle. Now, I can boast about the experience of having owned both – Trabant and VW Beetle. In my family we´ve had two Trabant, now I ride the Vocho. Only few people know that the constructor of this treasure, the famous Sir Ferdinand Porsche used to have Czechoslovak nationality and was born in a small town which you´ll nowadays find in the Czech Republic.
Mexico remained the last country in the world, where the VW Beetles were still produced, until the first years of this millenium. Even nowadays there are thousands of them crossing the Mexican roads. 
It is a marvellous feeling to sit behind the steering wheel and feel the old flavours of the beetle´s interior. However, I remember my friend Honza´s commentary, sitting one day on the seat of co-pilot in my Mazda 626 (year 1992) with electronic devices and modern interior, while we were driving from Budejovice to Prague. He said: “You know Luke, can you imagine that in the time the Japanese produced these Mazda, we still were producing the old Favorit, incomparable right?” I said: “Yeah mate, you´re right.” The comparing once again came on my mind, now Mazda vs. Beetle, which results even more incomparable.
What a pitty, Barum doesn´t export to Mexico anymore. Why? Further details you´ll find in my thesis, but generally, that ´s an old, well known song – the policy of the mother company - concern Continental - which bought Barum few years ago does not permit it. In spite of the fact the Mexicans like Barum and ask for Barum, they can´t buy it. The same which occurs with Škoda Auto, while being member of VW. For Volkswagen group it´s just inconvenient to let enter the Czech cars to Mexico as they know the probable consequence this would have on the proper mark VW. 
