• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Incident Underscores Need to Modernize U.S. Nuclear Arsenal and Rethink New START

    On October 24, 2010, at the Warren Air Force base in Wyoming, the United States Air Force lost communication with a sizeable portion of America’s nuclear deterrent: a squadron of 50 nuclear-armed Minuteman III intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). In the past, this type of disruption was rare and limited to individual missiles. The broad scale of this incident, however, resulted in one of the most serious and sizable ruptures in nuclear command and control in history.

    This incident comes in the midst of the Obama Administration’s effort to push the U.S. Senate to grant its advice and consent to New START, a nuclear arms control treaty with Russia, in the upcoming “lame duck” session of Congress. Given that each missile is responsible for covering a number of targets and that New START is set to further reduce the ICBM missile force, the gravity of the incident may have been exacerbated had the treaty been in effect. The 50 ICBMs that went down represent one-ninth of the U.S. ground-based ICBM arsenal.

    The incident underscores the need for a robust nuclear modernization and recapitalization of the U.S. nuclear arsenal and infrastructure, which has been atrophying since the end of the Cold War. The rush to ratification may prevent the Senate from examining the full implications of this incident in the context of New START’s planned nuclear arms reductions.

    The United States, alone among the world’s nuclear powers, has not been engaged in modernization of its nuclear triad. U.S. nuclear weapons are based on 1970s and 1980s designs. Originally, the planned service lifetimes were only a decade or two. By contrast, Russia and China have been upgrading each element of their nuclear triad, most notably in the area of long-range missiles. The Russians have also said that New START’s loopholes and permissive counting rules will allow them to deploy as many as 2100 warheads—well above the treaty’s 1550 limit to which the United States will certainly adhere.

    Incidents such as the one at Warren may become more common if the U.S. nuclear weapons infrastructure continues to deteriorate. The Senate must ensure that the Administration requests both authorization and appropriation funds to support modernization of the U.S. nuclear forces and infrastructure and, specifically, their command and control systems prior to its consideration of New START. It is unclear to the public whether the report from the President to the Congress on nuclear modernization required by Section 1251 of the National Defense Authorization Act for FY 2010 includes specific provisions related to modernization of command and control systems. The Senate’s Resolution of Ratification to New START that came out of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee included a provision endorsing a $624 million increase for nuclear modernization in fiscal year 2011. However, this level of spending is inadequate and will not ensure a reliable, sustainable and effective nuclear arsenal into the future.

    In addition to restoring and increasing the necessary funding for nuclear modernization, the Department of Defense should also conduct an internal review to see what happened. It should also convene a similar panel to the Secretary of Defense Task Force on DoD Nuclear Weapons Management. This panel should be asked to pay specific attention to this incident as well as the overall command and control of U.S. ICBM force. A similar panel was asked to investigate the source of the problem after a 2007 Minot Air Force Base incident when a B-52 mistakenly loaded with five nuclear warheads took a flight across the United States and after the Air Force accidentally shipped nose-cone fuse assemblies for Minuteman ICBM to Taiwan the same year. The Senate should wait for the task force to report before they take up New Start.

    Co-authored by Owen Graham and Michaela Bendikova

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    4 Responses to Incident Underscores Need to Modernize U.S. Nuclear Arsenal and Rethink New START

    1. quartercircle,Guthri says:

      My comment is they better vote against this new treaty and upgrade every launch platform in the arsenal and upgrade to the point we have now or even more because of the middle east and what Russia has saif they did not like but they pur up with it since the cold war and we should stay with it and update everything we have now for our sake.

    2. bodhi.australia says:

      as a student studying a defense force degree in australia a key ally of the US i belive that the US has to upgrade there missile technology china is and thats where our enemy lies not russia that war is over we won rember? china is the supporter of north korea and iran, iran in turn supports terriorsits in afganistan and iraq its a vicious cycle its in chinas interest to keep the US stuck down in small wars and not focused on large military confrontations cos thats exactly what china is planning on doing i suspect china will pressure iran to behave in a way that warrents a strike from israel then the US then they will blame the US for attacking iran we are in a complex situation as the west is been challenged by many countrys but they all follow the silk road back to china

    3. Bob Shearer says:

      Russia is a reemerging world power, economically. It is a world power because it has the largest amount of natural resources in the world.

      Russia is coming back solidly from the Soviet Era. They are also a world power because of their massive weapon, including nuclear weapons, arsenal.

      They are also a world threat because they can they can use terrorists to their own advantage. Terrorists can be used by two kinds of people: radical religious people, and the godless people. Russia is what I would call godless. All Russia has to do is arm the terrorists.

      We must have a firmer position against Russia, Medvedev and Putin. If the U.S. does not carry a big stick, such as Regan did, we will all end up in a mess.

      Nuclear weapons in the hands of terrorists are a huge threat. It becomes even larger when a country we are not on good terms with, like Russia, can use those terrorists to their own advantage.

      We should hold a country that arms terrorists accountable. We should treat them as if they themselves were terrorists. President Bush said he would do this, but he never followed through.

      Russia is and has always been a closed society, and that is another reason we cannot trust them and can only be cautious with them. They may turn on us at any moment, we need to hold them accountable and carry a big stick.

    4. Ace Sez says:

      Whether or not our icbm's launch as planned or sit in their silos and fizzle Obama doesn't give a dam-n–destroying the USA is his main goal and his agenda is further damage in the next 2 yrs of his regime–He'd sell us out tomorrow if the Russians or China, maybe even Iran demanded our surrender or else.

      We've got a gutless incompentant leader—who is more dangerous than most people know—he is undercover delivering the USA to total control by the UN

      Whats the answer?

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.