“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 UnionÐ 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 MaresÐ 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. Helen Thomas was particularly day or that will emerge in the years gime and the decades of tense stand- distraught: “If we forge ahead and to come?” off on the Korean peninsula, Iraq develop the bunker-busting nukes, Given the events of Sept. 11 and and North Korea in particular have are other nations like Russia and

AIR FORCE Magazine / June 2002 33 China going to just stand by? Are “Should the ... Nuclear Posture Re- inger said he wanted a more credible they going to refrain from trying to view ... become official policy, we strategy, more options, and a differ- produce similar weapons? I don’t can expect nuclear weapons to spread ent mental attitude toward nuclear think so.” around the world. We will live in a weapons. He pushed for develop- The problem with that statement far more dangerous world, and the ment of an arsenal better suited to is that Russia is desperately trying to United States will be much less se- attacking hardened Soviet silos, as reduce spending on nuclear arms. cure.” opposed to soft targets such as cit- Given the nature of the Russian ies. This continued under President economy, the possible agreement Save the Threshold! Carter and his Defense Secretary, between Presidents Bush and Putin The theme underlying much of the Harold Brown, who called it a on deep cuts in overall warhead lev- new criticism of the Bush NPR, from “countervailing strategy.” els, and the warming relations be- its warhead plans to its contingency The height of deterrence through tween the two countries, few expect lists to its possible targets, is this: In consideration of nukes as weapons of Russia to try to match the US in making the nation’s atomic arsenal war might have been reached with the earth-penetrating weapons. more usable, the Administration is introduction of intermediate-range China? Well, it is already building lowering the threshold to nuclear war. nuclear missiles in Europe 20 years up its nuclear forces—and for rea- “With the NPR, the US empha- ago. These were designed to counter sons that have little to do with worry sizes nuclear weapons not as devices similar Soviet weapons, primarily the over possible new engineering work of deterrence, but as weapons of war, SS-20, and make it clear that the US at Los Alamos and Lawrence Liver- and thus erodes the norms against really might use nuclear weapons to more National Laboratories. nuclear use,” said a statement from halt an attack on Western Europe. Furthermore, this is far from the the San Francisco anti-nuclear group The result? The INF Treaty, the first— first time that an administration has Global Security Institute. and so far only—such pact to elimi- openly mused about possibly devel- In response, the Administration nate an entire category of nukes from oping a new low-yield, earth-pen- contends that an adversary will, in the face of the Earth. etrating warhead. The weapons de- fact, be less likely to attack the United The Bush Administration’s Nuclear signers at the Department of Energy States with Weapons of Mass De- Posture Review does project unprec- have long had lists of advanced con- struction if it believes a nuclear re- edented change, in some respects. cepts initiatives that they would love sponse is a live possibility. In this What exactly would addition of con- to begin, given the green light. view, drawing up plans and produc- ventional weapons to the nation’s As far back as 1992, DOE budget ing weapons designed for specific strategic targeting plans entail? How documents listed an earth-penetrat- tasks does not erode deterrence; it would strategic defenses mesh with ing warhead as a weapon in the first, has precisely the opposite effect. the remaining nuclear arsenal, if they notional stage of design—along with Does this dispute sound familiar? ever actually come to pass? (And if a very low yield warhead capable of It should. It is one that dates to the you don’t think that’s a puzzle, con- destroying the chemical or nuclear early days of the nuclear age—and sider this thought problem: A rogue warhead of an attacking missile with in most respects, the pro-credibility state fires a nuclear missile at the assurance. side (or warfighters) prevailed in the US, and defenses successfully shoot “There will be requirements for policy debate long ago. it down. Is any further military re- new nuclear weapons in the future. It was McNamara, as President sponse required? If so, what should We cannot with confidence say now Johnson’s Secretary of Defense, who it be?) what they will be,” wrote John H. rejected extensive military nuclear However, most of the criticism Birely, then deputy assistant to the war planning in favor of a minimum has had a rote quality about it. It’s as secretary of defense for atomic en- deterrent approach. All the US needed, if they have dusted off all their sto- ergy. in his view, was an arsenal that could ries from the era of the nuclear freeze The program to modify the B-61 ride out a Soviet first strike and then and replaced the words “Ronald into interim earth-penetrator status respond strongly enough to destroy Reagan” with “George W. Bush.” was started during the Clinton years. a certain percentage of Soviet indus- Critics have tended to ignore the It entered the stockpile in 1996. try, population, and military might. report’s historical context and read The critics worried a lot about the The Air Force never really be- large political motives into propos- NPR’s supposed negative effect on lieved in this approach, with its im- als that are not as dramatic as they worldwide nonproliferation efforts. plicit targeting of civilians and its are made to seem. As Molly Ivins Take, for example, Rep. Barney all-or-nothing, spasm-response char- said, “Thinking about nuclear weap- Frank (DÐMass.). In a March 12 floor acteristics. ons is sort of like looking directly at speech, he looked at the NPR and Subsequent administrations didn’t the sun: If you do it for more than a conjured up this unflattering image buy it, either. Under President Nixon, split second, you go blind.” Appar- of America: “The town drunk is not Secretary of Defense James R. Schles- ently so. ■ going to be very credible preaching [nuclear] temperance.” Former Secretary of Defense Rob- ert S. McNamara also was worried Peter Grier, a Washington editor for the Christian Science Monitor, is a sick about this problem and was longtime defense correspondent and regular contributor to Air Force Maga- moved to write about it (with Thomas zine. His most recent articles, “The Strength of the Force” and “The Combi- Graham Jr.) in the Los Angeles Times: nation That Worked,” appeared in the April 2002 issue.

34 AIR FORCE Magazine / June 2002