WASHINGTON DC: The US military wants to overhaul its atomic arsenal anddevelop a new type of low-yield weapon that experts worry could lead togreater proliferation and heighten the risk of nuclear war.
The proposed changes to the nuclear weapons program, outlined in a draftversion of the Pentagon’s Nuclear Posture Review, mark a significant breakfrom the vision for America’s nuclear future under Barack Obama, who duringa famous speech in Prague in 2009 called for the elimination of nuclearweapons.
Arguing today’s security environment is vastly more complex than in 2010 –the last time the Pentagon published a nuclear review – the draft documentstates that the US needs to realign its nuclear policy with a “realisticassessment” of the threats it now faces, including from North Korea, Russiaand China.
“Global threat conditions have worsened markedly” since the 2010 nuclearpolicy review, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis wrote in the document’sintroduction, a leaked version of which was published by the HuffingtonPost.
“The United States now faces a more diverse and advanced nuclear-threatenvironment than ever before.”
The new strategy calls for a continuation of the nuclear modernizationprogram ordered by Obama, but notable changes include a call for theincreased development of low-yield nuclear weapons.
These devices, also known as “tactical” nukes, are still extremely powerfuland can pack as much destructive punch as the bombs dropped on Hiroshimaand Nagasaki at the end of World War II.
Policymakers worry that regular, large-yield weapons are essentially toobig to ever be detonated, as their use would likely result in large-scaleretaliation from an adversary and wipe too much of humanity off the map.
The Pentagon argues that by having more, smaller nukes it will counteradversaries’ “mistaken confidence” that the United States would not respondto another country using its own low-yield bomb.
“Expanding flexible US nuclear options now, to include low-yield options,is important for the preservation of credible deterrence against regionalaggression,” the document states.
The proposed policy says the Defense Department and the National NuclearSecurity Administration will develop a low-yield submarine-launchedballistic missile for deployment.
Such a capability would ensure “a prompt response option that is able topenetrate adversary defenses.”
Barry Blechman, co-founder of the Stimson Center, a nonpartisananti-nuclear proliferation think tank in Washington, warned that the reviewcontains major steps backward from the goals of previous administrations –to reduce the risk of nuclear war and prevent nuclear weapons spreading toadditional nations.
“Nuclear ideologues maintain that the US has to match the adversary’sarsenal, weapon for weapon, yield for yield, to deter nuclear use,”Blechman said in a statement to AFP.
“There is no empirical basis for this view, but it is widely held amongcivilians being appointed to positions in the” administration of PresidentDonald Trump.
As president-elect in December 2016, Trump called for the United States to“greatly strengthen and expand” its nuclear capabilities – and within daysof entering office he called for a new nuclear policy.
The nuclear review states that the development of new, lower-yield nuclearweapons is not intended to enable “nuclear war-fighting” that would see theUS military using the weapons on the battlefield.
The Pentagon declined to comment on the policy review, saying it remained“pre-decisional” and not approved by Trump. The final version is due forrelease February 2.
The document also states that Russia is upgrading its nuclear “triad” ofair-, sea- and land-based missiles to include a new “hypersonic glidevehicle” and a new intercontinental, nuclear-armed, undersea autonomoustorpedo.
The New York Times reported Wednesday that the policy review also outlineschanges to the threshold at which America could respond with nuclearweapons – including a massive cyber attack.
The document states that the United States would only consider usingnuclear weapons in “extreme circumstances.”
These include “attacks on the US, allied, or partner civilian population orinfrastructure, their command and control, or warning and attack assessmentcapabilities,” the document states.
Blechman said this goes against the spirit of the 1968 globalnon-proliferation treaty aimed at curtailing the spread of nuclear weapons.
“It would encourage those in many other countries who argue that nuclearweapons are essential to security,” he said.
The nuclear review states its commitment to the non-proliferation treaty“remains strong.”
But, it goes on, “the current environment makes further progress towardnuclear arms reductions in the near term extremely challenging.”
Michaela Dodge, a senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation thinktank, disputed critics’ contention that the new policy could lead to moreconflict, or that it would break the spirit of the non-proliferation treaty.
“Additionally, a decision to use nuclear weapons would not be madehaphazardly,” she told AFP.
The nuclear posture review “process is run by serious people with in-depthunderstanding of difficult nuclear weapons policy challenges.”