Efforts to establish a NATO-led European missile shield have  ricocheted off national political challenges, regional rivalries and  commercial interests, with a scheduled June meeting of allied and  Russian defense ministers pivotal to charting the way forward.
Russian  officials have directly linked participation in European missile  defense to the U.S.-Russian New START, which took force Feb. 5. Two days  after the strategic arms treaty went into effect, Russian Deputy  Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov told journalists that Russia would  consider withdrawing from the New START if Washington aggressively  pushed for the missile shield.
"If the U.S. bolsters the  qualitative and quantitative potential of its missile defense, a  question will arise whether Russia should further stick to the treaty or  would be forced to take measures to respond to the situation, including  military and technical measures," the diplomat said at a Feb. 7 news  conference.
At the NATO-Russia November summit in Lisbon, Moscow  and the alliance agreed to jointly develop a European missile defense.  However, Russian officials lately have expressed concerns that two  separate missile defense systems will be built in Europe: one by the  U.S. and NATO without Russian participation, and the second by NATO  together with Russia.
On Feb. 11, President Dmitry Medvedev  appointed Russia's special envoy to NATO, Dmitry Rogozin, to the newly  created post of special presidential representative on anti-missile  defense and ordered creation of an interagency task force to cooperate  with NATO. The group is expected to begin its work by March 31 and will  be responsible for coordinating the negotiating process with NATO.
"This  issue will really become either critically important for mutual  understanding and further rapprochement between Russia and the West in  military policies, or it will throw back our relations for several years  and maybe even decades," Rogozin said in Brussels on March 1, the  official RIA Novosti agency reported.
Deputy Defense Minister  Anatoly Antonov said at the Feb. 7 news conference that missile defense  is "a kind of litmus test that will allow us to see whether NATO members  and the United States are ready for open, equal, honest and  parity-based cooperation."
NATO and Russian defense ministers are  to convene in June to discuss the results of a missile threat assessment  by the group of experts who are also to report about the feasibility of  building a joint missile defense system.
The initial assessment  cites missile threats to Europe from the south, Rogozin said, but he  questions why some plans are oriented toward northern Europe.
"Buildup  of the strategic anti-missile defense in Northern Europe, where not a  single expert identified a possible threat, is an unpleasant signal for  us," he said, apparently referring to the U.S. plans to install elements  of the missile defense system in Poland.  Poland Poland has been at the  center of European missile defense efforts and conflicts. Under plans  proposed by U.S. President George W. Bush, Poland would have hosted  interceptors. President Barack Obama scrapped that plan for an  Aegis-ship based system, but still would install interceptors in Poland,  as announced during the March 3 visit to Washington of Polish Foreign  Minister Radek Sikorski.
Meanwhile, Poland also is pursuing a  national missile defense effort that could include a combination of  Patriots from Germany and development of a new system, although some  question whether these efforts conflict.
Polish Defense Minister  Bogdan Klich and Germany's former defense minister, Karl-Theodor zu  Guttenberg, discussed a possible sale of up to 12 Patriot missile  batteries during Guttenberg's Feb. 15 visit to Warsaw. "We are in the  middle of talks on acquiring a number of Patriot missile batteries from  Germany," Klich said at a press briefing after that meeting.
"We  are linked by common proposals, goals and priorities," Guttenberg said  at the briefing. "Poland is our partner. During the next few weeks, we  will be holding talks on this issue."
Meanwhile, according to  earlier reports by the local media, the Polish Ministry of Defense  planned to launch a tender for an air defense system by the end of this  year. The deal was reported to be worth about $5 billion.
In early  2010, five bidders responded to a request for technical specifications.  These included proposals submitted by Raytheon and Norway's Kongsberg;  MBDA and Poland's Bumar Group; Raytheon and Israel's Rafael; Germany's  Diehl BGT Defense; and Israel Aerospace Industries. "We have designed a  project of an air defense system, dubbed the Shield for Poland," said  Edward Nowak, chief executive of Bumar Group. "It currently is our most  significant project."
According to Nowak, the joint pitch of the  local defense industry and MBDA has been wrongly seen as directly  competing with plans to deploy elements of a U.S. missile shield on  Polish soil, and the two projects would complement each other.
State-owned  Bumar, which is Poland's largest defense group, said it hopes that  joining forces with European manufacturer MBDA, which is offering the  Aster 30 and VL Mica missiles, will improve its chances of securing the  multibillion-dollar contract.
"The lack of developed missile  products has been the biggest shortcoming of Poland's defense industry.  While we have the necessary know-how and technology in radio location  and C4ISR systems, we lack the technology in missile production," said  Tomasz Badowski, chief defense analyst at the Euro-Atlantic Association,  a think tank in Warsaw. "Cooperation with MBDA could permit [the Polish  industry] to bridge the tech gap."
As Germany's bid could  jeopardize the launch of the air defense tender, Bumar has intensified  its research efforts and hopes to get government funding to quickly push  ahead with a proposal and win the bid in its consortium with MBDA.
Poland's  troubled relations with Russia play a key role in Warsaw's drive to  acquire a new air defense system, analysts say. Medvedev visited the  Polish capital Dec. 6, a trip that marked the first official visit by a  Russian head of state to Poland in more than eight years, but the two  countries have maintained frosty relations until recently.
The  deployment of U.S. Patriot missiles on a training rotation at the Polish  military base of Morag, in the country's northeast, was blasted by  Moscow. Poland responded to Russia's objections in October, when the  missiles were moved from Morag, where they have been stationed since  last May, to the base in Torun, away from the Russian border.
Badowski  said Poland's current air defense system is outdated and, despite Army  modernization efforts, its cornerstone is based on Soviet technology.
"The  missile defense systems used by anti-aircraft units of the Air Force  are simply not capable of eliminating potential threats from the air,"  he said.
Norway In Norway, politicians skillfully linked support  for the NATO missile shield with its own strategic High North defense  plan. Norway had initially shown clear reluctance to row in behind the  NATO plan, but warmed to the project after persuading NATO to deepen its  commitment to High North and Arctic defenses.
The substantive  concern among Norwegian legislators and military was that the shield  would offer protection only to some NATO members; Norway was adamant it  protect all NATO states. The transition from being an opponent to a  supporter of the plan was rapid. Anne-Grete Strøm-Erichsen, Norway's  former defense minister, was the only representative to publicly voice  opposition to the plan at a NATO meeting in Vilnius in February 2008.
Strøm-Erichsen  told the NATO meeting in the Lithuanian capital that Norway questioned  the "need for a missile defense system," warning such a move could  trigger "an arms race."
Extending the system's geo-graphic range  was proposed during discussions between Benson Whitney, the then-U.S.  ambassador to Norway, and Norway's state secretary for foreign affairs,  Raymond Johansen.
Whitney noted that Norway was likely to abandon  its opposition if the protective umbrella was broadened to include all  NATO-aligned states in Europe, and if NATO was open to signing bilateral  agreements on missile defense with Poland and the Czech Republic.
Norway  regarded the widening of the protective range as pivotal to its  objective of strengthening its own anti-missile capability, primarily  directed at Russia's long- and medium-range missile arsenal on its  doorstep on the Kola Peninsula.
However, this strategic view  changed as Norway became more proactive in building a so-called "bridge  of cooperation" between NATO and Russia on the missile shield issue, in  the hope that a joint NATO-Russian solution would better serve the  country's security interests in the High North Norway's initial lukewarm  reception to the missile defense system was also influenced by its wish  to see NATO cooperate with Russia on a broader missile defense program.  The Norwegian view is that the dividend in NATO-Russian cooperation in  this arena is reduced tension in the High North and Arctic regions.
To  this extent, Norway got its wish when the Obama administration decided  to scrap the missile shield in Poland and the Czech Republic in favor of  expanding the shield program to include all NATO countries in Europe  and North America.
NATO-Russian missile shield cooperation has  long been regarded by Norway as the best means of accelerating the end  to the last remnants of the Cold War. Norway lobbied strongly for NATO  to invite Russia to the negotiating table ahead of the organization's  summit meeting in Lisbon last November. "By reaching out and inviting  Russia to cooperate with us, I believe we also have a real chance to  build a security roof for the entire Euro-Atlantic area," NATO Secretary  General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said in Lisbon. The U.S. and NATO have a  special interest in maintaining a trouble-free relationship with Norway,  which has increased its funding toward surveillance of Russian forces  on Kola and provided intelligence data on changing missile capabilities  and progress on new missile assets and tests by Russia in the region.
This  intelligence transfer will cover the planned test-firing of Bulava  missiles by the Severodvinsk-based Yuri Dolgoruky Borey-class  submarines, the newest strategic subs in Russia's fleet, in June or  July. Turkey In Turkey, a decision about acquiring a national long-range  air defense system will likely wait for several months after June  legislative elections. Meanwhile, Turkey's participation in the NATO  missile shield has involved some politically touchy issues.Turkey's  proposed national air defense system is being designed to counter both  aircraft and ballistic missiles, and will be independent from the NATO  missile shield. But since both systems are, by nature, anti-ballistic  missile schemes and both are supposed to protect Turkish soil, they will  have to be integrated in some way.
But the U.S. and some of its  Western partners are staunchly opposed to the integration of any Russian  or Chinese system into the NATO missile shield.
"American  officials already have said that non-NATO elements would cause serious  interoperability problems," one Turkish diplomat said.
The defense analyst said Western worries are related to both defense and commercial concerns.
"They  [the Westerners] simply don't want Turkey to select Russian or Chinese  options, and part of their concern is commercial," the diplomat said.
In  the event Turkey effectively drops Russia and China from the list of  contenders, the competition will be left to a rivalry between U.S. and  Italian-French companies.
At the Lisbon summit, Turkey managed to  persuade its NATO partners not to mention any countries as specific  threats, although French President Nicolas Sarkozy explicitly said the  ballistic missile threat was coming from Iran. At Turkey's request, the  need to protect all NATO territory was also included in the decision  text, as Turkey has close and developing ties with Iran.
"In any  case, Turkish and NATO officials will have tough talks, with Turkey  wanting a lot in return for the deployment of X-band radars on its  territory," the defense analyst said. "Again, the next Turkish Cabinet  will make the final decision on that." 
Nabi Abdullaev in Moscow,  Jaroslaw Adamowski in Warsaw, Burak Ege Bekdil and Umit Enginsoy in  Ankara, and Gerard O'Dwyer in Helsinki contributed.