U.S. Nuclear Arsenal to Be Slashed?

The Guardian reports a draft Nuclear Posture Review (being performed by the Department of Defense) has been rejected by President Obama for its ‘timidity.’ According to “European officials,” (they're ubiquitous, aren't they?) the rejection regards three reasons:

1. The President wants to measure the U.S. nuclear arsenal in “hundreds rather that thousands of deployed strategic warheads.”

2. The President wants to narrow the range of conditions under which the U.S. would use nuclear weapons.

3. The President wants to explore ways of ensuring the reliability of nuclear weapons without testing or making new weapons.

These three points are interesting to say the least. Here are some things to think about that correspond with each of the three items mentioned above:

1. The arsenal is already measured in hundreds. It’s twenty-one. If we measured it in thousands, we’d call it 2.1. The reality is we need a nuclear arsenal that optimizes our security and meets our defense needs, whether the number is five thousand, five hundred, or five. Nuclear weapons employment should be strategy based and the number of weapons required is a reflection of the strategy, not the other way around.

2. Only the President has the authority to release nuclear weapons (unless we get into one of those de-evolution of command scenarios).  As such, the President determines the conditions when nuclear weapons will be used.  Was the use of nuclear weapons (some would call them atomic weapons) at the end of World War II against Japan not justified? That’s the only time they’ve ever been employed for effect.

3. Ensuring nuclear reliability without testing is analogous to ensuring your car will run without ever driving. Yes, you can make sure you know where the key is, check the battery, electrical system, air in the tires, and gas supply, but unless you start the engine and move it out of the garage, you’re never quite really sure. And after not moving the car for twenty years, you’re really not sure.

If the article is true, the President’s position may present a challenge for Secretary Gates, who has been a nuclear realist and has in the past advocated for a reliable replacement warhead.

It will be interesting to hear how Thursday’s UN address plays out, but as my mother would say, when nukes are outlawed, only outlaws will have nukes. OK, she really doesn’t think in those terms, but it is something beyond a bumper sticker.

It’s been said don’t bring a knife to a gun-fight. How about don’t bring a daisy cutter to a nuclear war?