From Interfax:  Russian State Duma Speaker Boris Gryzlov said the Duma would not ratify the new strategic arms treaty with the United States if it does not se

From NATO:   [W]e must develop an effective missile defence. In the coming years, we will probably face many more countries – and possibly even some non-state actors -- armed with long-range missiles and nuclear capabilities. Therefore, I believe that NATO’s deterrent posture should include missile defence. Deterrence works against rational actors, but not all actors that we will have to deal with in the future will be rational.  That’s why deterrence and defence need to go together.  And why we have the obligation to look into missile defence options. Excerpt from Speech by NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen at Strategic Concept Conference in Warsaw.  (photo: NATO)

From atlantic-community.org:  [B]y the very end of the Bush presidency, the administration issued a presidential directive on Arctic Region Policy, to update US assessments of the north. In this directive, the administration underlined that the United States has broad and fundamental national security interests as well as fundamental homeland security interests in the Arctic. The directive presents both priorities that the US traditionally has had in the region, such as the freedoms of the seas, deployments of sea and air systems, missile defense and early warning, in addition to policy elements more directly affected by the retreating Arctic ice-cap, such as safe maritime activity, energy security and environmental sustainability.

From RIA Novosti:  Russia can not allow U.S. plans to deploy elements of its missile shield in Europe to threaten the effectiveness of its nuclear deterrent, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said on Wednesday. U.S. officials admit that the missile defense system in Europe might be able to hit Russian inter-continental ballistic missiles by 2020. "The U.S. administration says its global missile shield program is not directed against Russia. However, our conclusions on the true potential of the future missile defense system should be based on specific military and technical factors, not on words," Lavrov said. "We will not accept a state of affairs when a missile defense system poses a threat to Russia's nuclear deterrence potential," he went on.  (photo: Ilya Pitalev/RIA Novosti)

From Spiegel:  NATO, in its current form, is not up to these tasks. In the future, the alliance should see itself as a strategic framework for the three centers of power: North America, Europe and Russia. This trio has common interests that are threatened by the same challenges, and which require the same responses. If the alliance intends to be the primary forum for addressing all crises -- because it is the only forum where North America, Europe and Russia sit at the same table -- then it must now establish the requisite institutional framework for that to happen. The door to NATO membership should be opened for Russia. Russia, in turn, must be prepared to accept the rights and obligations of a NATO member, of an equal among equals...

From the AP: Russia has serious concerns about U.S. plans to deploy missile interceptors in Romania, the Foreign Ministry said Friday.

From Reuters: Poland is set to host a battery of U.S. Patriot missiles and the American troops to man it from the start of April, PAP news agency said Sunday. "The Defense Ministry expects the first stage of the stationing of a Patriot air-defense battery and a 100-man service team to get under way in the (northern) town of Morag at the turn of April," the agency said. The Patriots are part of a Polish-U.S. agreement signed last December to upgrade the NATO member's air defenses, following Washington's decision last September to scrap a Bush-era Missile Shield incorporating installations in Poland and the neighboring Czech Republic.