President Barack Obama recently laid out his vision of a world free of nuclear weapons. A panel of nuclear strategy experts' advice on how to get there: Take the tiniest of baby steps.
The Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States -- tasked by Congress to take a comprehensive look at U.S. nuclear weapons policy -- released its final recommendations this morning. And in his preface, chairman William Perry sounds downright pessimistic about the president's goal. "Indeed, if the vision of nuclear elimination is thought of as the 'top of the mountain,' it is clear that it cannot be seen at this time," he writes. "But I believe that we should be heading up the mountain to a 'base camp' that would be safer than where we are today."
On first read, the panel has erred on the conservative side: Among other things, the report recommends that the triad (the ability to deliver nukes by ICBM, submarine and bomber) be preserved for the immediate future; that missile defenses continue to be developed, where feasible; and that further reductions in deployed weapons be pursued cautiously. The U.S.-Russia Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty expires at the end of the year, but the commission notes: "Follow-on treaties entailing deeper reductions would require finding a way of dealing with very difficult problems, to include 'tactical' nuclear forces, reserve weapons and bringing in other nuclear powers."
As I read it, the commission does not stake out a clear position on the Reliable Replacement Warhead, a new warhead based on a tested design that would have a long shelf life and robust design. The commission, however, suggests that the "stockpile stewardship" approach -- maintaining the current stockpile without testing -- may open the door for tweaking some components of existing warheads. "The decision on which approach is best should be made on a type-by-type basis as they age," the executive summary states. "So long as modernization proceeds within the framework of existing U.S. policy, it should encounter minimum political difficulty."
This is not the final word on nukes: The Pentagon, in parallel, recently launched its own Nuclear Posture Review. And the panel failed to come to agreement on a key issue: Whether or not to ratify the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty, something Obama supports. But whether you are a nuclear abolitionist or a modernizer, there's probably one point you can agree on: A re-examination of the U.S. nuclear arsenal is long overdue. The U.S. nuclear weapons stockpile is aging; the military's attention to the nuclear mission has lapsed; and the risk of nukes falling into the wrong hands is rising.
[PHOTO: Wikimedia]
ALSO:
- Gates on Nuclear Disarmament: Not So Fast
- Obama’s ‘No Nukes’ Push: Reagan Redux?
- Nuke Abolitionists vs. ‘Modernizers’ in WMD Smackdown
- Nuke Labs to Move to the Pentagon?
- Nuke Lab Can’t Keep Snoops Out
- Los Alamos: 19 Nuke Violations, 57 Classified Info Breaches in …
- Nuke Labs Blast Jobs; 750 Out at Los Alamos
- Nuke Lab Workers’ SOS to Congress
- Nuke Lab Gives Secrets to Stoners
- Los Alamos Managers E-Mail Nuke Secrets
- Nuke Lab, Broken Down
- California’s Nuclear “Prize”
- Nuke Lab Bunglers’ $11 Billion Reward
- The Best Musician on the Manhattan Project
- Bush Pick: Nukes = Jobs
