Issue 1345 14 December 2018 // USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

Feature Report

“U.S. Strategic Nuclear Forces: Background, Developments, and Issues”. Published by Congressional Research Service; Updated Nov. 21, 2018 https://fas.org/sgp/crs/nuke/RL33640.pdf Most Members of Congress have supported the general contours of U.S. nuclear posture. While some programs have been open to scrutiny, Congress has continued to support funding for most aspects of the ongoing modernization programs. Nevertheless, questions about the costs of these programs, and the trade-offs they might require within the defense budget, have surfaced in recent years, particularly following the passage of the Budget Control Act in 2011. These concerns may receive additional attention in the 116th Congress. While Senator James Inhofe, who will likely chair the Senate Armed Services Committee, has offered strong support for the nuclear modernization programs, Representative Adam Smith, who is likely to chair the House Armed Services Committee, has noted that “the current $1.5 trillion plan to build new nuclear weapons and upgrade our nuclear weapons complex is unrealistic and unaffordable.” This report reviews the ongoing programs that will affect the expected size and shape of the U.S. strategic nuclear force structure. It begins with an overview of this force structure during the Cold War, and summarizes the reductions and changes that have occurred since 1991. It then offers details about each category of delivery vehicle—land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), submarine launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs), and heavy bombers—focusing on their current deployments and ongoing and planned modernization programs. The report concludes with a discussion of issues related to decisions about the future size and shape of the U.S. strategic nuclear force.

Issue No. 1320 22 June 2018

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 2

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

TABLE OF CONTENTS NUCLEAR WEAPONS  Nuclear Bomb Tail Kit Reaches Major Milestone for Production Phase (U.S. Air Force) The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration is responsible for the B61-12 nuclear bomb assembly. The Air Force is responsible for the B61-12 TKA, joint integration of the bomb assembly and TKA into the “all-up-round” of the weapon, and its integration with aircraft.  Inhofe ‘Urging’ Trump to Boost Defense, Sees ‘No Strategic Rationale’ for Cuts (Defense News) Inhofe and HASC chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, on Wednesday, lobbied the president to reject a planned $700 billion defense budget request, ordered by the White House budget office, in favor of a rival $733 billion budget which aligns with the National Defense Strategy.

US COUNTER-WMD  Missile Test Called Model for Future U.S.-Japan Weapons Development (National Defense) The Missile Defense Agency and the Navy on Dec. 11 successfully conducted an operational live-fire test to track and intercept an intermediate-range ballistic missile target.  Here’s the Latest on Lockheed’s Massive Long-Range Anti-Ballistic Missile Radar (Defense News) The radar, which is being developed and tested at Lockheed’s radar manufacturing facility in Moorestown for the Missile Defense Agency, is slated to be installed at Clear Air Force Station, Alaska.

US ARMS CONTROL  Iran Can Expand Range of Its Missiles, Says Revolutionary Guard Commander (Defense News) U.S. President Donald Trump in August reactivated economic sanctions on Iran after leaving a multilateral Iran nuclear deal because the deal did not ban Iran’s testing of ballistic missiles.  Trump Ultimatum Sparks Fears of New Arms Race (The Hill) The decades-old nuclear arms agreement has kept Russia and the U.S. from developing and testing certain intermediate-range missiles.

COMMENTARY  NNSA Administrator: Strengthening America through Nuclear Security (Defense News) With Russia and China pursuing entirely new nuclear capabilities and the ongoing negotiations to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula, the geopolitical challenges are pressing.  Our Deep Divide over Nuclear Disarmament (The Hill) The deep divide within the NPT community over disarmament will make it difficult, if not impossible, to make progress on U.S. non-proliferation goals in the near term and eventually may cause the treaty to lose relevance as non-nuclear states reconsider the treaty’s value.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 3

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

NUCLEAR WEAPONS

U.S. Air Force (Washington, D.C.) Nuclear Bomb Tail Kit Reaches Major Milestone for Production Phase By Leah Bryant Dec. 7, 2018 KIRTLAND AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. (AFNS) -- The Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center received formal approval in late October to enter the production phase for the B61-12 nuclear gravity bomb’s new guided tail-kit assembly, or TKA. “This marks the completion of a highly successful development effort for the tail kit,” said Col. Dustin Ziegler, AFNWC director for air-delivered capabilities. The AFNWC program office recently passed the Air Force review of the weapon system’s development and received approval to end its engineering and manufacturing development phase and enter the next phase for production of the tail kit. In the production phase, the testing environment will more closely approach real-world environments. Known as Milestone C, the decision to enter this next phase marked the completion of a series of developmental flight tests. The program office completed a 27-month test program in less than 11 months, with 100 percent success for all of its 31 bomb drops. The accelerated schedule, as well as other risk mitigation strategies, enabled the program office to save more than $280 million in development costs, according to Ziegler. “The flight tests demonstrated the system works very well in its intended environment,” said Col. Paul Rounsavall, AFNWC senior materiel leader for the B61-12 TKA, Eglin AFB, Florida. “This development effort brought the first-ever digital interface to the B61 family of weapons and demonstrated the B61-12 TKA’s compatibility with the Air Force’s B-2 and F-15 aircraft. In addition, the TKA achieved greater than five times its required performance during developmental testing and is ready to start initial operational test and evaluation.” The Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration is responsible for the B61-12 nuclear bomb assembly. The Air Force is responsible for the B61-12 TKA, joint integration of the bomb assembly and TKA into the “all-up-round” of the weapon, and its integration with aircraft. Headquartered at Kirtland AFB, AFNWC is responsible for synchronizing all aspects of nuclear materiel management on behalf of Air Force Materiel Command and in direct support of Air Force Global Strike Command. The center has about 1,100 personnel assigned to 18 locations worldwide, including Eglin AFB; Hanscom AFB, Massachusetts; Hill AFB, Utah; Kirtland AFB; and Tinker AFB, Oklahoma, in the U.S. and Ramstein Air Base in Germany. https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/1707698/nuclear-bomb-tail-kit-reaches-major- milestone-for-production-phase/ Return to top

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 4

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

Defense News (Washington, D.C.) Inhofe ‘Urging’ Trump to Boost Defense, Sees ‘No Strategic Rationale’ for Cuts By Joe Gould Dec. 5, 2018 WASHINGTON — Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman Jim Inhofe said he used a recent two-hour White House meeting with President Donald Trump, Vice Mike President Pence and national security adviser John Bolton to urge the administration to reverse course on a planned cut to the fiscal year 2020 national defense budget. “I’m urging the president to consider” approving a “strategy-driven budget,” he said Thursday in a speech at the National Defense University focused on his priorities for the committee. "There’s no strategic rationale for any cut” to the defense budget, which stood at $716 billion for 2019, he said. Inhofe and HASC chairman Mac Thornberry, R-Texas, on Wednesday, lobbied the president to reject a planned $700 billion defense budget request, ordered by the White House budget office, in favor of a rival $733 billion budget which aligns with the National Defense Strategy. The remarks come days after Trump tweeted that the size of the FY19 defense budget he signed last year was “Crazy!” Trump said he hoped for talks soon with his Russian and Chinese counterparts to end, “what has become a major and uncontrollable Arms Race” — a likely reference to negotiations over the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. A supporter of the president and proud conservative, Inhofe made the candid admission that, “I cringe a little,” whenever Trump tweets. He said he doesn’t blame Trump, however, for trying to get around a media that, “hates him.” “I have to admit — confession’s good for the soul — every time I hear that a tweet is coming out, I cringe a little,” Inhofe said. “But, wouldn’t it be kind of nice if he had someone to bounce those off, change the wording maybe a little bit? But how else can he circumvent a media that hates him?” Surrounding himself with uniformed military officers Thursday, Inhofe paired partisan jabs at the media, “liberals,” and President Obama with praise for Trump on defense spending, seating judges and the economy. Asked about rising deficits in the face of his defense spending proposal, Inhofe suggested cutting social programs and dismissed tax cuts. As defense hawks head into a budget season marked by a divided Congress, Inhofe has launched a media blitz to amplify his message that the Pentagon’s planned $733 billion top-line is “a floor, not a ceiling” and that he wants three-to-five percent real growth in the defense budget. Budget Control Act Looms Large Inhofe reiterated his argument for exempting defense from the 2011 Budget Control Act’s caps, which has been a non-starter with Democrats who have fought for parity between defense and non- defense spending each year since the BCA was passed. Inhofe said he hoped to break parity for FY20. “The top priority in this country should be defense,” he said. “People here in the military, with your orientation, know what I’m talking about. The general public doesn’t. A lot of the media’s making them believe we don’t have any threats out there, and a lot of this is a waste of money.” Inhofe also struck some conciliatory notes towards Democrats. Inhofe expressed confidence in Congress reaching a bipartisan deal to lift budget caps for the last two years of the Budget Control Act, where caps for discretionary defense spending stand at $542 billion for FY20 and $555 billion for FY21.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 5

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

After trading barbs last week with his soon-to-be counterpart at the House Armed Services Committee, Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., Inhofe called Smith "a good man,” who he likes personally. Inhofe had swiped at Smith’s position that modernization of the nuclear triad is unaffordable, but Inhofe said Thursday, “We’re two different people with two different philosophies.” Because a recent bipartisan National Defense Strategy Commission report ranked Russian and Chinese strides in nuclear weapons development as a top national security concern, “I think he made a mistake when he singled out nuclear modernization,” Inhofe said of Smith. “I think it was a bad choice and I think it is one he and I can talk about,” Inhofe said. “I think we’re going to see, even though Democrats have control of the House, when it gets down to defending America, we’re going to be much closer together.” Inhofe literally held up the commission’s report, which paints a dire picture of America’s military edge and calls for added defense spending to maintain it. Inhofe reiterated his plans to prioritize modernization spending to compete with Russia and China — which have been “busy” as the U.S. has “toyed with” nuclear modernization. Inhofe stressed Russia’s investment in hypersonic weapons, but also touted China’s construction of islands in the South China Sea (“They are everywhere”), touted China’s presence in Africa (“It’s a very scary thing”), and he claimed China’s navy would outpace America’s in two years. Asked why he considered China a threat when the U.S. defense strategy considers it a competitor, he said, “Anyone who has anything better than we do is a potential threat, and my job is to minimize that." https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2018/12/06/inhofe-urging-trump-to-boost-defense- sees-no-strategic-rationale-for-cuts/ Return to top

US COUNTER-WMD

National Defense (Arlington, Va.) Missile Test Called Model for Future U.S.-Japan Weapons Development By Stew Magnuson Dec. 11, 2018 The successful interception of an intermediate-range ballistic missile target over the Pacific earlier this week bodes well for cooperation between the United States and Japan when it comes to high- tech weapon development, industry leaders said. The Missile Defense Agency and the Navy on Dec. 11 successfully conducted an operational live-fire test to track and intercept an intermediate-range ballistic missile target. It marked a number of firsts including: a successful intercept from a land-based launch; the intercept of the intermediate- range missile; and the first use of tracking data from sensors placed in another location, also known as “engage on remote.” Raytheon served as the lead system integrator of the Standard Missile-3 Block IIA interceptor with subcomponents coming from a variety of Japanese companies led by Mitsubishi Heavy Industries.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 6

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

Cooperation between the two countries on weapon development may become a trend, said Mitch Stevison, Raytheon strategic and naval systems vice president. “Not only did it ... combine the resources of both countries to provide this great interceptor capability, it also set the stage for future activity between the two countries and what we can do together,” he said. That extends from the development and operation of the systems in the defense of the two nations, he said. Navy sailors at the Aegis Ashore Missile Defense Test Complex at the Pacific Missile Range Facility at Kauai, Hawaii, conducted the test with an Aegis Ashore-launched Standard Missile-3 Block IIA interceptor, according to an MDA statement. Raytheon also provided the AN/TPY-2 radar used in the engage-on-remote capability. The test consisted of a target air-launched by a U.S. Air Force C-17 from an ocean area thousands of miles southwest of the ashore test site, from where the Navy launched the interceptor. The engagement employed a ground, air and space-based sensor/command-and-control architecture linked by the Ballistic Missile Defense System's Command and Control, Battle Management and Communications suite, the statement said. MDA Director Air Force Lt. Gen. Sam Greaves said in the statement that the test was an important milestone and it supported a critical initial production acquisition milestone for the SM-3 Block IIA missile program. It also was of great significance to the future of multi-domain missile defense operations, he added. Stevison said if the Defense Department and Japanese Ministry of Defense gave SM-3 Block IIA production the greenlight, the cooperation would continue with the manufacturing of subcomponents. Meanwhile, industries from the two nations will continue to improve the technology based on the current tests, he added. “This is only the beginning … of [Block] IIA in terms of looking at continuing to improve the system. We’re going to learn from this test just as we have learned from other tests,” Stevison said. Based on preliminary data, the test met its objective, and program officials will continue to evaluate system performance based upon telemetry and other data obtained during the test, the MDA statement said. Stevison said the test will help put the agency on a firm path to intercepting longer-range intercontinental ballistic missiles. The test gives further “confidence that this system is going to work against some of the most sophisticated threats,” he said. While distances in the test are classified, they would be similar to the threats faced in Europe, he added. http://www.nationaldefensemagazine.org/articles/2018/12/11/missile-test-called-model-for- future-us-japan-weapon-development Return to top

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 7

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

Defense News (Washington, D.C.) Here’s the Latest on Lockheed’s Massive Long-Range Anti-Ballistic Missile Radar By David B. Larter Dec. 9, 2018 MOORESTOWN, New Jersey -- Lockheed Martin is on schedule to deliver its massive solid-state Long-Range Discrimination Radar in 2020, according to executives who spoke Friday with reporters here. The radar, which is being developed and tested at Lockheed’s radar manufacturing facility in Moorestown for the Missile Defense Agency, is slated to be installed at Clear Air Force Station, Alaska. Construction on the facility began in September, according to a Lockheed press release. The radar achieved a major technical milestone in October when it successfully tracked a satellite using its hardware and software working in conjunction. Ultimately the radar will be used in conjunction with ground-based interceptors to defend the U.S. from ballistic missile attacks. The technology that is going into LRDR is opening up new lines of business for Lockheed, said Chandra Marshall, the LRDR program director. “Not every application needs to be the size of LRDR, so it’s scalable from both a hardware and software perspective,” Marshall said. The radar destined for Japan's AEGIS Ashore installation is a scaled-down version of LRDR, Marshall said. It's also technology Lockheed is hoping to bring to the new homeland defense radar in Hawaii, which should be awarded in the coming days. Lockheed has developed the radar and the software concurrently, Marshall said, which has sped up fielding. One of the key advantages of the radar, which is about 25-times larger than a AN/SPY-1 array, is that it can be maintained and fixed without bringing the array down. “One of the unique things about this radar is the high availability,” Marshall said. “Unlike some radars in the field today, you can actually maintain the radar while it’s operating. You don’t have to interrupt the mission to maintain it.” Lockheed accomplishes this by building the massive radar on a series of self-contained transmitter and receiver units that are grouped in blocks, which are in turn connected to a breaker. So if one unit in a block needs replacing, you can shut down a small section of the radar and switch it out while the rest of the radar continues to radiate. The announcement for the Hawaii homeland defense radar should come in December, Marshall said. “It ... leverages everything that we’ve done for LRDR and improves on it based on the different threats that we have to attack for HRD-H,” Marshall said. If Lockheed can secure the HDR-H contract, it could mean two more contracts for homeland defense radars down the line. Lockheed is competing with Northrop Grumman and Raytheon for the contract that could be worth up to $4.1 billion. https://www.defensenews.com/land/2018/12/09/heres-the-latest-on-lockheeds-massive-long- range-anti-ballistic-missile-radar/ Return to top

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 8

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

US ARMS CONTROL

Defense News (Washington, D.C.) Iran Can Expand Range of Its Missiles, Says Revolutionary Guard Commander By Joe Gould Dec. 10, 2018 WASHINGTON — A senior commander in Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps said Monday that Tehran has can expand the range of its missiles beyond the current limit of 2,000 kilometers — the latest in a war of words with Washington. “We have the capability to build missiles with higher ranges,” IRGC Aerospace Force commander Brig. Gen. Amir Ali Hajizadeh said, according to the Fars news agency. “The number 2,000 kilometers is not a divine decree … what has been decided until today is based on our needs.” Hajizadeh noted that many “enemy bases” were located 300 to 800 kilometers from the country’s borders. The remarks, to Iranian university students in Tehran, came days after the U.S. and Iran traded accusations over Tehran’s latest ballistic missile test — and amid accusations that Tehran tested a missile that can reach European countries. U.S. President Donald Trump in August reactivated economic sanctions on Iran after leaving a multilateral Iran nuclear deal because the deal did not ban Iran’s testing of ballistic missiles. On Dec. 1, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo accused Iran of test-firing a medium-range ballistic missile capable of carrying “multiple warheads,” in violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 2231. The missile “allows it to strike parts of Europe and anywhere in the Middle East,” Pompeo said. Iranian officials have since said that Iran has no plans to develop nuclear weapons, and in a recent news release, it called America’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal as “unlawful.” Iranian officials in recent days have stressed the precision-striking power of the country’s arsenal. The U.N. Security Council subsequently discussed the matter behind closed doors without taking action. However, Britain’s U.N. ambassador, Karen Pierce, told reporters afterward that members expressed “a lot of concern” about the test launch and said the 2015 resolution doesn’t say nuclear weapons must be on the missiles. She called Iran’s actions “inconsistent” with the resolution and “part and parcel of Iran’s destabilizing activity in the region.” “If you wanted to demonstrate to the international community that you were a responsible member of it and you were genuinely interested in regional peace and security, these are not the sorts of missiles you would be test launching,” Pierce said. U.S. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis recently said that “right now the strategic level of threat from Iran is less worldwide than (North) Korea’s, but it is certainly significant regionally, and it could grow beyond that if it’s not dealt with.” The Associated Press contributed to this report.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 9

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 // https://www.defensenews.com/global/2018/12/10/iran-can-expand-range-of-its-missiles-says- revolutionary-guard-commander/ Return to top

The Hill (Washington, D.C.) Trump Ultimatum Sparks Fears of New Arms Race By Ellen Mitchell Dec. 9, 2018 President Trump’s ultimatum to Russia over a landmark arms control treaty could potentially kill the pact and set the stage for more land-based cruise missiles and nuclear warheads in Europe, experts and Democratic lawmakers warn. The Trump administration on Tuesday said it would suspend its obligations under the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty in 60 days if Russia did not get back in line with the pact. The decades-old nuclear arms agreement has kept Russia and the U.S. from developing and testing certain intermediate-range missiles. Russia denies it is in violation of the treaty. And with chances slim that Moscow will meet U.S. the demands, some experts are sounding the alarm. “We’re going to increase the risk that a crisis could go nuclear,” said Jon Wolfsthal, the National Security Council senior director for arms control and nonproliferation under former President Obama. “It’s almost certain the Trump administration will pull out of the treaty,” added Wolfsthal, now senior adviser to Global Zero, an international nuclear-reduction initiative. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced the INF suspension on Tuesday following meetings with NATO foreign ministers, describing Russia’s violations of the INF as part of a broader pattern of “lawlessness” by Moscow on the global stage. The move was expected. Trump signaled in October that he planned to unilaterally withdraw the United States from the pact. NATO ministers also released a statement agreeing unanimously that Moscow was in violation of the treaty. “Allies have concluded that Russia has developed and fielded a missile system, the 9M729, which violates the INF Treaty and poses significant risks to Euro-Atlantic security. We strongly support the finding of the United States that Russia is in material breach of its obligations under the INF Treaty,” the NATO foreign ministers said in a statement. Experts as well as current and former officials mostly agree that Moscow is in violation of the accord — which bans all land-based cruise missiles with a range between 310 and 3,410 miles. But some worry the decision to withdraw from the treaty could spur an arms race. In response to the ultimatum, Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that Russia would begin to develop the disputed nuclear weapons if the U.S. withdraws. An end to INF would allow Russia to keep the missiles it has been building and deploying, while the United States — possessing no similar missile that could be deployed in Europe — would be “letting the Russians off almost scot-free,” Wolfsthal said.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 10

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

“In the long run, as we develop more missiles, as we either deploy them in Asia or as we try to respond to Russian deployments," he said. "We’re going to add new rungs on the nuclear ladder of escalation.” Some U.S. lawmakers have criticized Trump for not properly consulting Congress or NATO in the decision. “The Trump administration is unilaterally taking action on the INF Treaty without meaningful consultation and coordination with our NATO allies,” Rep. Adam Smith (D-Wash.), who will be the House Armed Services Chairman in the next Congress, said in a statement. Smith also took aim at national security adviser John Bolton, who has long opposed the treaty. “It is no secret that some of President Trump’s advisers are more focused on promoting U.S. withdrawal from its international commitments than prioritizing the collective security of America and its partners and allies,” he said. Republican lawmakers, meanwhile, have lauded the administration’s decision as a necessary step to rein in “Russian deception,” according to Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman James Inhofe (R-Okla.). “For too long, Vladimir Putin has openly flaunted the INF treaty and President Trump is right to put him on notice. The United States will no longer tolerate Russian deception at the expense of national security and the security of our allies,” Inhofe said in a statement. “A treaty with only one side complying is unsustainable. Can Putin be trusted to uphold Russia’s international commitments? I won’t hold my breath.” Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.), meanwhile, asserted that Washington needs to “change old policies to ward off new threats” and “must not allow our authoritarian rivals to build and deploy dangerous, destabilizing weapons while we keep one hand tied behind our back.” Wolfsthal, though, worried that the administration has provided no way to ease tensions. He criticized Trump officials for not giving the Russians any sort of off-ramp. “Nobody really thinks that the Russians, even it good times, are going to back down, but not giving them a face-saving way out really seals the fate of the treaty,” Wolfsthal said. Conservative experts have taken a different view. James Carafano, a defense policy expert at the Heritage Foundation, agreed that the “chances of Russians coming back into compliance in the next 60 days are likely zero.” But he called the pressure simply “the first step in a series of chess moves” by the United States. “I don’t think the risks are very high,” he said of Trump abandoning the treaty. Should the administration decide to withdraw from the agreement, language of the treaty stipulates that there is a six-month notice period to officially exit the pact. Both sides acknowledge the high-stakes involved in Trump's gambit. “I think the gains are we have put additional strategic pressure on the Russians, that this is now something that they have to take into account. It has, I think, enhanced the U.S. negotiating position,” Carafano added. "It definitely has helped strengthen broad European resolve that Russia is a destabilizing and threatening force." Wolfsthal, though, sees Trump looking to walk from the pact. “The Trump administration really doesn’t want a deal," he said. "They want to get out.”

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 11

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 // https://thehill.com/policy/defense/420364-trump-ultimatum-sparks-fears-of-new-arms-race Return to top

COMMENTARY

Defense News (Washington, D.C.) NNSA Administrator: Strengthening America through Nuclear Security By Lisa Gordon-Hagerty Dec. 10, 2018 The 2018 Nuclear Posture Review did not flinch from reality. With Russia and China pursuing entirely new nuclear capabilities and the ongoing negotiations to denuclearize the Korean Peninsula, the geopolitical challenges are pressing. There are challenges at home, too. Following the end of the Cold War, the infrastructure and capabilities needed to maintain a credible U.S. nuclear deterrent were neglected. Staring down these realities, the 2018 NPR, released in February, set a clear course to modernize the nuclear security enterprise to face 21st century threats. The time is long past to provide the dedicated stewards of the U.S. nuclear deterrent with a modern, safe infrastructure and the critical tools needed to maintain it. At the Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration, we are moving with a sense of urgency to implement this guidance. The imperative is unquestionable — to strengthen our nation through nuclear security. Looking to 2019, the NNSA is about to mark a major milestone under budget and ahead of schedule by completing production of the W76-1 warhead for the U.S. Navy. This program prolongs the service life of the original W76-0 — a submarine-launched ballistic missile system first introduced into the stockpile in 1978 — from 20 to 60 years, providing four more decades of extended deterrence from the sea-based leg of our nuclear triad. The success we’ve achieved on the W76-1 is a testament to our ability across the nuclear security enterprise to deliver on commitments to the Department of Defense, Congress and the American people. Yet, work on the W76 warhead will not cease with the completion of this life-extension program. The NPR called for a low-yield ballistic missile capability to allow for tailored deterrence in the face of evolving threats. And, with a proven path forward for modernization programs, we will continue to make progress on the B61-12, W80-4 and the W88 Alteration 370 in 2019. However, our responsibilities also include ensuring that our current and future weapons and the nuclear security complex are flexible enough to adapt to future challenges. We are embarking on a much-needed course correction, and formulating a strategy to develop and maintain the full suite of capabilities to address an uncertain future. The NPR states that there is “no margin for further delay” in recapitalizing the infrastructure to produce strategic materials and components, namely plutonium pits. This year the Nuclear Weapons Council certified the NNSA’s recommended alternative for recapitalization of the plutonium pit production mission. The plan calls for repurposing the Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Facility, or MOX, at the Savannah River Site in South Carolina and for maximizing pit production activities at Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 12

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

In 2019, the NNSA will proceed with this strategy. We are conducting a safe, secure wind down of the MOX project and retaining as many talented employees as possible for the future pit production plant at the Savannah River Site. Meanwhile, at Los Alamos, we continue significant investments to update Cold War-era facilities so they have the resources and infrastructure necessary for this vital mission. The U.S. nuclear deterrent is much more than warheads and bombs. The people and facilities underlying our weapons programs are crucial to a robust nonproliferation and arms control program. The technical expertise required for stockpile stewardship naturally lends itself to our second mission pillar — nonproliferation, counterproliferation and nuclear counterterrorism. The NPR reaffirmed the need for effective measures to reduce global nuclear threats. NNSA experts work with our global partners to prevent the theft of nuclear and radioactive materials; improve capabilities to detect and deter proliferation; and reduce the availability of proliferation-sensitive equipment and technologies. Our third mission pillar is powering the U.S. Navy, and the NNSA’s Naval Reactors unit continues its unblemished record of safe nuclear propulsion. Naval Reactors is contributing its expertise to the U.S. Navy’s Columbia-class program. This next- generation, nuclear-powered submarine, as the NPR states, will ensure required sea-based deterrence capabilities for decades. While our infrastructure must be revitalized, one key part of the nuclear security enterprise is as capable as it has ever been: our people. We are at the highest level of activity since the Cold War and have launched an integrated plan to recruit the next generation of scientists, engineers and technicians for the enterprise. As I traveled to our eight labs, plants and sites in 2018, I was left with one overwhelming impression: The NNSA is up to all the challenges laid out in the NPR and every charge we are given. With professionalism and patriotism, the workforce at the NNSA makes me most confident about mission accomplishment in 2019 and beyond. Together, as a team, we are strengthening our nation through nuclear security. Lisa Gordon-Hagerty is the administrator of the National Nuclear Security Administration, which falls under the purview of the U.S. Department of Energy. https://www.defensenews.com/outlook/2018/12/10/nnsa-administrator-strengthening-america- through-nuclear-security/ Return to top

The Hill (Washington, D.C.) Our Deep Divide over Nuclear Disarmament By Rebecca Davis Gibbons Dec. 11, 2018 Pundits and scholars have warned about the impending collapse of the nuclear nonproliferation regime since the advent of the Treaty on the Nonproliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT). Fortunately, with the help of U.S. leadership, the nuclear nonproliferation regime has survived 50 years since the NPT opened for signature in 1968 and there are the same number of nuclear states today as there were 30 years ago (nine, having swapped South Africa for North Korea).

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 13

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

Today, pessimism about the future of the nuclear nonproliferation regime is again on the rise. This time, the cause for sounding the alarm is the deepening divide within the NPT community over the lack of progress on nuclear disarmament. Most of the world’s states are non-nuclear members of the NPT. The NPT did not prohibit nuclear weapons, but it required the five states that possessed them at the time of the treaty’s drafting to agree to eventually get rid of their arsenals. The NPT’s Article 6 commits all parties, including the five nuclear weapons possessors in the treaty, to “pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament.” Many non-nuclear states see nuclear-related developments around the world through the lens of this Article 6 commitment. Frustration over lack of disarmament progress was already at an all-time high in the summer of 2017 when 122 states came together to adopt a new international agreement, the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW). With a sense that there was no way to make progress on nuclear disarmament through established channels such as the NPT, a group of states and advocates decided to establish a new treaty banning all nuclear weapons-related activities. The TPNW was never expected to cause immediate disarmament — none of the nuclear-armed states supported its adoption — but it is meant to delegitimize nuclear weapons and to create a norm against their possession. The deep divide within the NPT community over disarmament will make it difficult, if not impossible, to make progress on U.S. non-proliferation goals in the near term and eventually may cause the treaty to lose relevance as non-nuclear states reconsider the treaty’s value. The situation has worsened over the past year as the United States has shown a lack of regard for nuclear arms control. While the purpose of arms control is distinct from that of disarmament, U.S. leaders traditionally have linked their progress on nuclear arms control agreements to their Article 6 commitment. Members of the NPT will see a rejection of arms control as a rejection of pursuing disarmament. A seeming disinterest in arms control is evident in President Trump’s refusal to talk to the Russian government about extending the 2011 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START) for another five years when it expires in 2021. Putin has offered to extend the treaty on multiple occasions. In addition, some members of Congress have indicated concern over extending the treaty. Rejecting the extension of New START not only has significant strategic repercussions including reduced intelligence collection and the potential for nuclear arms racing, it signals to the NPT community that the United States no longer is in the business of trying to set limits on nuclear weapons. Perceptions that the United States no longer cares for arms control were compounded on Dec. 4 when Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced that the United States would withdraw from the 1987 Intermediate Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF) in 60 days if Russia did not come back into compliance. While the blame for cheating on the INF treaty resides squarely with the Russians for deploying banned missiles, other states likely will hold the United States responsible for causing the collapse of the treaty by withdrawing. They may question whether the United States made enough effort to try to resolve the crisis within the bounds of the treaty. Many will see this action as the U.S. reneging on another nuclear agreement. Some may even wonder if the United States wants to withdraw in order to build up its own intermediate range nuclear missiles. The U.S. withdrawal from the INF, for better for worse, will be perceived as another sign that U.S.-Russian arms control is dead and that the NPT nuclear weapon “haves” are doing little to comply with their Article 6 commitment.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 14

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

Today the nuclear nonproliferation regime that has served U.S. interests for 50 years is at real risk of faltering, as the United States and Russia are not pursuing additional disarmament and do little to maintain the existing arms control architecture. The regime has allowed the United States to promote nonproliferation in a way that is more legitimate and less costly than alternatives, including inducements, sanctions and even war. While it is unlikely that non-nuclear states will start exiting the NPT soon, they will be more likely to see it as a failed bargain and will be less interested in cooperating with U.S. nonproliferation goals, such as strengthening the withdrawal clause of the NPT or promoting universal adoption of stronger IAEA safeguards. The nuclear nonproliferation treaty is unlikely to be a useful mechanism for promoting nuclear nonproliferation in perpetuity if the majority of its membership no longer buys the basic bargain: that those without nuclear weapons will not acquire them, those with nuclear weapons will take efforts to get rid of them. Rebecca Davis Gibbons is a research fellow at the Project on Managing at the Atom at Harvard Kennedy School’s Belfer Center. She previously was a visiting assistant professor of government at Bowdoin College. https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/420446-our-deep-divide-over-nuclear- disarmament Return to top

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 15

// USAF CSDS News and Analysis Issue 1345 //

ABOUT THE USAF CSDS The USAF Counterproliferation Center (CPC) was established in 1998 at the direction of the Chief of Staff of the Air Force. Located at Maxwell AFB, this Center capitalizes on the resident expertise of Air University — while extending its reach far beyond — and influences a wide audience of leaders and policy makers. A memorandum of agreement between the Air Staff’s Director for Nuclear and Counterproliferation (then AF/XON) and Air War College commandant established the initial personnel and responsibilities of the Center. This included integrating counterproliferation awareness into the curriculum and ongoing research at the Air University; establishing an information repository to promote research on counterproliferation and nonproliferation issues; and directing research on the various topics associated with counterproliferation and nonproliferation. In 2008, the Secretary of Defense's Task Force on Nuclear Weapons Management recommended "Air Force personnel connected to the nuclear mission be required to take a professional military education (PME) course on national, defense, and Air Force concepts for deterrence and defense." This led to the addition of three teaching positions to the CPC in 2011 to enhance nuclear PME efforts. At the same time, the Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center, in coordination with the AF/A10 and Air Force Global Strike Command, established a series of courses at Kirtland AFB to provide professional continuing education (PCE) through the careers of those Air Force personnel working in or supporting the nuclear enterprise. This mission was transferred to the CPC in 2012, broadening its mandate to providing education and research on not just countering WMD but also nuclear operations issues. In April 2016, the nuclear PCE courses were transferred from the Air War College to the U.S. Air Force Institute for Technology. In February 2014, the Center’s name was changed to the Center for Unconventional Weapons Studies (CUWS) to reflect its broad coverage of unconventional weapons issues, both offensive and defensive, across the six joint operating concepts (deterrence operations, cooperative security, major combat operations, irregular warfare, stability operations, and homeland security). The term “unconventional weapons,” currently defined as nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons, also includes the improvised use of chemical, biological, and radiological hazards. In May 2018, the name changed again to the Center for Strategic Deterrence Studies (CSDS) in recognition of senior Air Force interest in focusing on this vital national security topic. The Center’s military insignia displays the symbols of nuclear, biological, and chemical hazards. The arrows above the hazards represent the four aspects of counterproliferation — counterforce, active defense, passive defense, and consequence management. The Latin inscription "Armis Bella Venenis Geri" stands for "weapons of war involving poisons."

DISCLAIMER: Opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed or implied within are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Air University, the United States Air Force, the Department of Defense, or any other US government agency.

twitter.com/USAF_CSDS | au.af.mil/au/csds // 16