From the letter: As Central and Eastern European (CEE) intellectuals and former policymakers, we care deeply about the future of the transatlantic relationship...We are Atlanticist voices within NATO and the EU...Twenty years after the end of the Cold War, however, we see that Central and Eastern European countries are no longer at the heart of American foreign policy.
These former leaders and intellectuals should be asking why "Old Europe" is not "Atlanticist." With the fall of the Soviet Union, it is reasonable to expect that Central and Eastern Europe would not be at the "heart of American foreign policy." For the umpteenth time, I suggest that they should direct their concerns to the EU and their NATO colleagues in Europe first so that these organizations reach a consensus on what their foreign policy objectives are and how they define their relationship with the US.
You can create all the phony strawmen you want. Obama has not scrapped the ABM shield yet, but he might. This letter may give him some backbone on the issue. But it would be far better if such a letter came from the EU and NATO reaffirming the stationing of ABMs in Poland and the Czech Republic. And the letter would have be far better if it had not attacked the Bush administration and tossed in extraneous issues like the visa wavier program.
The transatlantic relationship can only be strengthened if the Europeans recognize that they can no longer expect the US to shoulder the major burden of defense in the region. Old Europe and New Europe need to get their own house in order first.
With all your fixation on cost, you should probably look at both sides of the ledger. And asking pre-Sarkozy France or pre-Merkel Germany for help regarding Russia is a fool's errand. The U.S. should lead, because the U.S. has vital interests in the region. Your policy recommendation appears to be, "get out of their way but complain if we won't get what we need," scattered with weasel-words such as "would be far better," "should be asking," and "consensus."