“Rogue” America, mad monsters rising from the ashes, and other tales from the nuclear watchdogs. By Peter Grier LASSIFIED excerpts of the nuclear weapon and contemplating cant aspect of the NPR was its “al- Bush Administration’s Nu- pre-emptive strikes against a list of most casual breaking of long-stand- clear Posture Review hit non-nuclear powers, Washington ing policy taboos about the unthink- the newspapers in March. would rightly label that nation a dan- able.” Soon, all hell broke loose. Not since gerous rogue state. Yet such is the Not to be outdone, Joseph Cirin- the woolly days of the nuclear freeze course recommended to President cione of the Carnegie Endowment movement 20 years ago had the world Bush.” concluded, “Nuclear weapons are no seen such a torrent of criticism di- Some commentary was overwrought longer the weapon of last resort but rected at strategic weapons policy. to the point of hysteria. It was as if, weapons of first choice. ... The nuclear Never mind that most of the infor- having lapsed into a pleasant dream nuts have seized control of the policy mation revealed in the leaks could state at the end of the Cold War, a apparatus.” have been inferred from the unclas- host of anti-nuclear activists had sified summary of the NPR released awoken and were shocked, shocked Out of Retirement weeks earlier. Never mind that many to discover that the US nuclear arse- First prize in this category must of the Bush recommendations ech- nal had not simply melted away. surely be awarded to a master of the oed ones that the Clinton Adminis- Thus Robert Scheer, a veteran anti- genre, writer Jonathan Schell, whose tration presented in its own 1994 military voice whose column appears popular 1982 book, The Fate of the nuclear review. in the Los Angeles Times, held that Earth, explained at great length why No, overheated analysts concluded the review was akin to “an infantile nuclear weapons are not healthy for that Bush officials had proposed tantrum born of the Bush Admin- children and other living things. Now changes in planning which, if imple- istration’s frustration in making good writing for The Nation, Schell main- mented, would make it substantially on its overblown promise to end the tained, “Other countries are looking more likely that someday—perhaps terrorist scourge.” on with alarm—fearful that a mon- soon—a nuclear weapon would be Washington Post columnist Mary ster, driven mad by righteous fury used in anger somewhere in the world. McGrory saw it as nothing less than and dizzy with its own power, is “Mr. Bush needs to send that docu- “a farewell to arms control and non- rising out of the ashes of Sept. 11 to ment back to its authors and ask for proliferation, the work of doomsday bellow destruction to the world.” a new version less menacing to the planners who have at last succeeded Some analysis was, to put it chari- security of future American genera- in selling their idea that nuclear weap- tably, imprecise. Syndicated colum- tions,” huffed the New York Times in ons are no different from the con- nist Molly Ivins, lamenting possible an editorial titled, “America as Nuclear ventional kind and equally useful in development of “cute nukes” (her Rogue.” combat.” phrase for smaller, earth-penetrat- It asserted: “If another country Thomas Oliphant, in the Boston ing weapons proposed by the NPR), were planning to develop a new Globe, opined that the most signifi- talked about the “dear, departed days 32 AIR FORCE Magazine / June 2002 of MAD (Mutual Assured Destruc- Bush’s references to the “axis of certainly been the subject of some tion).” Of course, for the United evil” and Weapons of Mass Destruc- degree of nuclear planning. States, MAD is not a policy but a tion, a reasonable person could eas- A reasonable analysis of the con- condition, one that exists due to the ily have deduced from Crouch’s text would lead one to the conclu- nation’s vulnerability to attack by words that the Pentagon is thinking sion that the Bush plan in this re- long-range strategic weapons, of about how nukes might be used to spect is, in fact, status quo—and which Russia—notwithstanding its deter or counter rogue states. simply reflects the direction in which new political relationship with the There was little comment on this US strategic policy has been moving US—still has a few. It is not a “doc- theme upon the initial release of NPR. for years. Despite this, James O. trine” that can be changed at an Instead, most criticism focused on Goldsborough of the San Diego Union– administration’s whim and not one another issue: “warhead warehous- Tribune was moved to write that “a that any sane person would want to ing.” Weapons withdrawn from ser- radical militarization of the country adopt anyway. vice would not necessarily be de- is taking place, and this new nuclear Some reaction was simply un- stroyed, under NPR plans. If needed, posture is part of it.” parseable. For example, local anti- they could be used in the future to nuclear activist Victoria Mares– build up the US strategic arsenal, Sacred Moratorium Hershey, writing in the Portland said officials. Perhaps the second most-criticized (Maine) Press Herald, emitted the aspect of the Bush NPR concerns its following words: “In reality, that is Naming Names open discussion of the possibility of the potential of integrating nuclear Then, in early March, the Los An- developing new nuclear warheads. weapons whatever their physical geles Times, New York Times, and Such work, as critics rightly note, appearance and semantical reference GlobalSecurity.org published some would likely create a requirement into the volatile world we are walk- classified details from the NPR study. for new underground nuclear tests, ing on today.” Thus the vague phrase “potential ending Washington’s 10-year unof- To quote White House fixture adversaries” was replaced with a list ficial testing moratorium. Helen Thomas, whose own Hearst of specific countries. According to Specifically, the NPR urges an column breathlessly held that Presi- the NPR excerpts, the US needs to advanced concepts initiative that dent Bush is seriously considering keep a range of contingencies in mind would possibly include “modifica- using nuclear weapons in his war on when sizing the nuclear force. Among tions to existing weapons to provide terrorism, “Where would it all end?” them are possible hostile actions by additional yield flexibility in the Where, indeed? Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, and stockpile; improved Earth-Penetrat- The Bush Administration’s Nuclear Syria. “All sponsor or harbor terror- ing Weapons (EPWs) to counter the Policy Review was the first such ists, and all have active WMD [Weap- increased use by potential adversar- consideration of US strategic doc- ons of Mass Destruction] and mis- ies of hardened and deeply buried trine since Clinton’s study in 1993– sile programs,” reads the NPR. facilities; and warheads that reduce 94. An unclassified summary was The response was swift and dra- collateral damage.” unveiled at the Pentagon Jan. 9. The matic. Critics across the nation in- Current earth-penetration capabil- Bush NPR proposes a so-called New terpreted this as a new targeting ini- ity resides in the B61 Mod 11 grav- Triad composed of strike forces tiative on the part of the White House. ity bomb, which is limited in number (nuclear and non-nuclear), missile The review “expands the list of coun- and effectiveness, notes the review. defenses, and a revitalized national tries considered potential nuclear A more effective warhead would al- nuclear weapons infrastructure. targets,” said the New York Times low many buried targets to be at- This New Triad would require editorial on the subject. tacked with a much lower yield many fewer warheads than is true of The reaction raises at least three weapon than a surface burst would today’s force, according to the NPR. large points: require. “This lower yield would Per Bush’s agreement with Russian 1. The Clinton Administration, achieve the same damage while pro- President Vladimir Putin, operation- which rarely disappointed arms con- ducing less fallout (by a factor of 10 ally deployed weapons could be re- trollers, was moving in the same di- to 20),” notes the NPR. duced to between 1,700 and 2,200 rection, per its own Nuclear Posture Again, the January release of the over the next 10 years. Review results. unclassified version of NPR hinted In January, DOD officials said that 2. President George H.W. Bush, at this proposal. Perhaps critics thought the basic point was to shift from in the run-up to the Gulf War, left that the earlier call for a “revital- Cold War “threat-based” planning open the possibility of a US nuclear ized” nuclear infrastructure referred to new “capabilities-based” planning. response to Iraqi use of Weapons of to dismantlement facilities. J.D. Crouch II, assistant secretary of Mass Destruction. In any case, the response of critics defense for international security 3. Do critics seriously think the was to denounce the thinking about policy, explained the approach: “What Pentagon has never drawn up plans “mini-nukes” as both unnecessary are the kinds of capabilities that we to use nuclear weapons against any and indicative of a dangerous mind- need to counter the potential adver- nations other than the Soviet Union, set. Some warned of a return to the saries or the capabilities of potential Russia, and perhaps China? Consid- bad old days of the nuclear arms adversaries that are either extant to- ering the nature of the Baghdad re- race.