remewAIR U N I VE R S IT Y from the editor's aerie Since I do not foresee that atomic energy is to be a great boondor a long time, I have to say that for the present it is a menace. Perhaps it is well that it should be. It may intimidate the human race into bringing order into its international affairs, which, without the pressure of fear, it would not do. Albert Einstein as quoted in Peter’s Quotations. Ideas for Our Time edited by Dr. Laurence J. Peter Though we did not plan it that way, it seems quite fitting that the current crop of articles appears at the centennial of the birth of Albert Einstein. From his incomparable work in physics and through his celebrated letter warning President Roosevelt of the potential of nuclear devastation, there is a more or less straight line to our lead article on the strategic aspect of neutron weapons. Professor Don Snow’s fine article on that subject provided inspiration for our cover, which illustrates the serious complexities the enhanced radiation weapon holds for both humanity and our environment. It is also appropriate that the Einstein centennial and our cover accommodate two other articles: John Kohout’s analysis of the future of the manned bomber and Jill Heuer’s discussion of Soviet scientific and engineering manpower. We hope you find this collection stimulating, and any comments from you are welcome. By now, the science of which Einstein was a founder has matured to the point where it has a rapidly growing history of its own. The bibliography of nuclear warfare and the associated arms control efforts are reaching gigantic dimensions that rival those of air power itself. One of the primary tools for such studies has been United Slates Air Force History— A Guide to Documentary Sources. A testimonial to the pace of this technological expansion is the fact that the book, published only in 1973, is already somewhat dated and a revision is under way. Any of our readers having suggestions or pertinent documents for the new edition should contact Lawrence J. Paszek of the Office of Air Force History (Autovon: 297-4548). Writings on arms control, a topic much in the news, provide the subject for M.l.T. Professor Mark Katz’s fine review-article. For those who believe that generalship was invented before Hiroshima, Dr. I. B. Holley of Duke University has given us his analysis of the most recent biographies of one of the Army's great men, John J. Pershing. As a final word, readers who think they might like to get involved in this book reviewing effort have only to call Major Ted Kluz at Autovon 875-2773 (Commercial 205-293-2773) for more details. July-August 1979 Vol. X X X No. 5 articles Strategic Implications of Enhanced Dr. Donald M. Snow 2 Radiation Weapons: A Preliminary Analysis Interdependence, Specialization, Col. William J. Taylor, Jr., USA 17 and National Security': Problems for Diplomats, Soldiers, and Scholars A Post B-l Look at the Manned Lt. Col. John J. Kohout III, USAF 27 Strategic Bomber 52 Military Justice: Is It Equal? Maj. Felix Fenton Moran III, USAF departments MILITARY AFFAIRS ABROAD Soviet Professional Scientific Jill E. Heuer and Engineering Manpower 62 BOOKS AND IDEAS 6 8 Generalship Maj. Gen. I. B. Holley, Jr., USAFR 80 Debating Deterrence Herman S. Wolk 82 Ideals, Interests, and Arms Control Mark N. Katz 87 Potpourri 95 THE CONTRIBUTORS N July 1977 the Carter administration an- Development Agency] failed to delete from nounced that it was prepared to arm the published testimony at a House public works IW70-3 Lancp missile with the so-called appropriations subcommittee hearing the fact “enhanced radiation” or “neutron” warhead for that the warhead . was to be produced.”4 theater use, primarily against Soviet armor in The technology underlying ER warheads is Europe. The announcement has caused a flurry thus “an old one,” as one author puts it.5 There of reaction and debate both within the United is, however, little knowledge about this kind of States and among members of the North device in the literature and little understanding Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) al- of how so-called “neutron bomb effects” liance. The debate has focused on several compare to other forms of nuclear reaction. issues regarding use of this type of warhead at Basically, there are three forms of nuclear the tactical level, while discussions of possible reaction in warheads: fission, fission-fusion, strategic implications of enhanced radiation and fission-fusion-fission.6 (ER) bombs have been missing from analysis. • Fission, which involves splitting atoms of The context of the current debate has unstable elements such as U-235 or plutonium focused on the short-range delivery (the Lance and creating energy from that process, is the missile has a 170-mile range) of small warheads simplest and most primitive. The result of supporting conventional forces. The fission, which was the basis of the original deuterium-tritium fusion reaction, which is the atomic bombs, causes many residual particles, basis of ER warfare, is not limited to small some of which are highly radioactive, to be warheads but can be extended to warheads of released into the atmosphere Many of these the megaton or larger yield; there are practical radioactive particles find their way back into but not theoretical limits to the size of a fusion the ecosystem, resulting in a high level of reaction. contamination or residual radiation and, thus, Although the original announcement of the the designation of fission bombs as “dirty” wedding of the ER warhead with the Lance weapons. missile created the impression that a new’ technological breakthrough in warhead design • In the fission-fusion form of reaction, had been achieved, the technology, in fact, is energy production results from fusing deuteri- not new at all. Rather, the “basic designs for the um and tritium atoms under high temperatures ‘enhanced radiation device’ . .. were complet- to form helium, with the emission of a “fast” ed at California’s Lawrence Livermore Lab- neutron as a by-product. As Legault and oratory in December, 1958,” and the first Lindsey describe it: experimental weapon was detonated in spring The main fusible nuclei are the heavy isotopes of 1963, according to a Los Angeles Times hydrogen: deuterium (H2) and tritium (H3) __ At account.1 Work on ER weaponry’ was largely temperatures of tens of millions of degrees, H2 associated with development of the antiballis- and H3 will fuse, liberating a very fast neutron and tic missile (ABM) system,2 an Army project a great amount of energy.7 that may help explain why, in its 1977 The process is called fission-fusion because reincarnation, ER weaponry has been associat- creation of the heat necessary to begin the ed with tactical battlefield applications. Ac- fusion process requires the use of a small fission cording to Washington Post reporter Walter explosion or trigger. Fusion itself does not Pincus, “the Ford administration ... originally create any residual radiation, although the requested funds for the enhanced-radiation freeing of neutrons by the process creates Lance,”3 public knowledge of which came enormous initial neutron and gamma radiation. about when ERDA [Energy Research and Some residual radiation is emitted by the 3 4 AIR UNIVERSITY REVIEW fission trigger, and there is some concern about emission of neutrons. As Harold M. Agnew the physical properties of otherwise inert explains it: materials when they are subjected to neutron . the fusion process produces neutrons, heat, bombardment. There are no theoretical limits blast and fallout but produces many more on the size of a fusion reaction. Since the entire neutrons and, specifically, more high-energy reaction occurs in milliseconds and because of neutrons in relation to the other products than the randomness of neutron emission, not all the does the fission process.8 possible fusions of deuterium and tritium will Thus, the secret to enhancing the radiation occur, so that practical warhead designs place from this kind of weapon involves maximizing an upward limit in the one-megaton (MT) the proportion of neutron emission compared range. to other nuclear effects. Feld summarizes the • In the fission-fusion-fission process, the degree to which this can occur: reaction begins with a fission trigger, which in In principle, if it were possible to neglect the turn initiates a fusion reaction. The fission- effects of the fission trigger, a pure thermonuclear fusion-fission warhead, however, has an outer bomb . could release up to 80 percent of its coating of fissionable material, such as U-236 energy in the form of fast neutrons.9 or plutonium, the reaction of which is triggered The power of the reaction derives from the by the heat and neutron emission of the fusion fact that the so-called “fast neutrons” emitted process. To obtain very large (i.e., multiple in the thermonuclear reaction create more megaton) blasts requires use of fission-fusion- energy than neutrons produced in fission. fission; thus, the chain reaction associated with Frank Barnaby notes that “the neutrons it has a kind of multipler effect which allows produced during the fusion process have much very large yields (the Russians purportedly greater energy than fission neutrons. On have tested a 85-megaton device using this average, each deuterium-tritium fusion event process). Since the ultimate factor in the produces 14 MeV of free neutron energy, reaction is fission, however, there is the compared with 3 MeV for each fission event. 10 creation of the same kind of residual radiation Moreover, “fusion is a more efficient explosive as is associated with the simple fission process.