US Nuclear Policy Review Changes Deterrent Strategy: Official

Home>>World

Last updated at: (Beijing Time) Thursday, January 10, 2002

US Nuclear Policy Review Changes Deterrent Strategy: Official

MESSAGE BOARD

CHINESE

SEND TO FRIEND

A classified Pentagon review of U.S. nuclear policy calls for fundamental changes to the country's nuclear deterrent, shifting from high dependence on nuclear weapons to wider use of conventional weapons and building of a missile defense system, a top Pentagon official said Wednesday.

The new policy will cut the number of offensive nuclear weaponswhile increasing the options the Bush administration will have, said J.D. Crouch, assistant defense secretary for international security.

He made the remarks at a news briefing on the Nuclear Posture Review made by the Ministry of Defense. The policy report, the first review of U.S. nuclear deterrent since 1994, was submitted to Congress on Tuesday.

Crouch said the review changes the strategy from the traditional threat-based approach to a capabilities-based approach.

"Under the threat-based approach, the size of our force was primarily a reflection of a specific threat. There was an emphasison nuclear offensive forces," he said. "The capabilities-based approach argues that there may be multiple contingencies and new threats that we have to deal with. We're focusing on how we will fight, how we will have to fight, not who or when, and we don't really know."

"We have to have capabilities that would deal with a broad range of the potential capabilities that adversaries may array against us," he said.

Given the changed international security environment, the Cold War approach to deterrence that was highly dependent on offensive nuclear weapons is no longer appropriate, he said.

Nuclear weapons are still a key part of the deterrent strategy,"but we also believe that other kinds of capabilities will be needed in the future," he said. These other capabilities include advanced conventional capabilities, missile defense and better command, control, intelligence and planning, he added.

Under the new plan set in the review, the U.S. nuclear arsenal of about 6,000 warheads will drop to around 3,800 by fiscal 2007 and to between 1,700 and 2,200 operationally deployed warheads by fiscal 2012, a pledge President George W. Bush made to Russian President Vladimir Putin in November last year.

"This means we will deploy the lowest number of nuclear weaponsconsistent with U.S. security requirements," Crouch said.

But instead of calling for a total destruction of the weapons removed, the review proposes that some warheads be made inactive, meaning that they would be simply put in storage, where they couldbe reactivated on relatively short notice, he said.

Some warheads would be destroyed, but officials have not decided how many or when, Crouch said.

The U.S. needs to keep the warheads in reserve in case the world situation changes and most previous arms control treaties donot require that warheads be destroyed, he noted.

Many Democrats and arms control advocates contend that unless the nuclear warheads are completely dismantled, proposals to cut the stockpile will do nothing to encourage the Russians to reduce their arsenal of about 6,000 warheads.

The review also calls for the destruction of 50 Peacekeeper intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBM) in Wyoming, and the removal of four Trident submarines from strategic service, according to Crouch. The Air Force's B-1 bomber would not be nuclear capable.

More importantly, the U.S. would remove some warheads from operationally deployed ICBMs and submarine-launched missiles.

Crouch argued that a missile defense system, designed to destroy missiles before they reach their targets, would offer the U.S. more options in its military strategy.

In an effort to build a controversial missile defense system, Bush announced on December 13 that the U.S. would withdraw from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, which banned such a system.

"What we have here is a concept of reductions of our nuclear forces, but the introduction of some new elements will help to mitigate risks as we introduce new elements to the force," Crouch said.