• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • House Acts Preemptively to Preserve Nuclear Force

    The House of Representatives has taken one step toward preventing the deterioration of America’s nuclear forces.

    It approved an amendment to the defense appropriations bill for fiscal year 2013 last Thursday that would prohibit the Obama Administration from using the funds provided in the bill to reduce the nuclear forces of the United States.

    The amendment comes in the context of press reports that the Administration is on the cusp of completing the Nuclear Posture Review Implementation Study (NPRIS). Since the report has yet to be released, the action by the House represents a preemptive step. Preemptive action, however, is what is needed here.

    Established Obama Administration policy in favor of eliminating U.S. nuclear weapons means that the NPRIS is certain to recommend reductions in U.S. weapons for the reason of advancing the disarmament policy at the expense of other policy considerations, such as strengthening deterrence, the survivability of the nuclear force, international stability, and the nuclear umbrella that helps assure the security of U.S. allies around the world.

    The Administration will be tempted to use the report to leave the impression that these other policy considerations were addressed in the course of the study, when in reality they were subordinated to the disarmament agenda.

    If, in fact, the study subordinated other critical policy considerations to the Obama Administration’s disarmament agenda, the report should be expected to contain a number of critical structural weaknesses, including:

    • A weak or contradictory policy for assigning targets for U.S. nuclear weapons;
    • A recommendation for a nuclear force structure that is nowhere near as survivable as it should be against an enemy strike;
    • A nuclear force structure that fails to complicate enemy attack options against both the U.S. and its allies;
    • A nonsensical recommendation to de-alert the U.S. nuclear force;
    • An insufficient commitment to modernizing the U.S. nuclear weapons complex, the weapons themselves, and the delivery means;
    • No recommendation for updating and strengthening the command-and-control structure for the U.S. nuclear force;
    • An insufficient commitment to modernizing the short-range (“tactical”) nuclear force in a way that bolsters the long-established policy of extended deterrence for the protection of U.S. allies and that reassures the allies about the U.S. commitment to their security;
    • A lack of integration of U.S. nuclear weapons into a broader strategic posture, which should also include conventional strike systems and defense systems; and
    • No cost-effectiveness assessment of the nuclear force relative to other elements of the overall U.S. defense posture.

    Congress has little choice but to take preemptive action if it wants to preserve its policymaking prerogatives and the effectiveness of the U.S. nuclear deterrent. In the past, U.S. arms control and disarmament options were established in order to advance the effectiveness of the U.S. strategic and nuclear postures. The Obama Administration is likely pursuing the NPRIS in a way that turns that process on its head and establishes U.S. arms control and disarmament options without consideration of their negative impact on the overall effectiveness of the U.S. strategic and nuclear postures, or perhaps even explicitly at the expense of the effectiveness of these postures.

    Accordingly, Congress is right to intervene now. Redressing the shortcomings of a flawed NPRIS only at a later date will permit significant damage to the overall national security of the U.S. and its allies.

    Posted in Security [slideshow_deploy]

    2 Responses to House Acts Preemptively to Preserve Nuclear Force

    1. Richard Avalon says:

      This piece of nonsense is based upon neo-con and far-right fantasies and false assumptions. It is an attempt to create a fake altered reality.

      The amendment is yet another attempt by the anti-American GOP to "stick it to" President Obama, at the expense of sanity, rationality, and America's security, perhaps at the behest of the "military industrial complex".

      Rationally, how many warheads would it actually take to neutralize Russia and/or China? How many strategic targets need to be hit to totally neutralize those nations; to reduce them to operational insignificance? President Obama is right. We need to cut back our warheads.

      As for your points, are we to take your assertion seriously that there is no coordination between nuclear and non-nuclear forces for strategic purposes? Really? Also, President Obama has provision for updating the nuclear force he wants to keep. Furthermore, the need for tactical nukes is almost non-existent. In which context would they be used today, which would not lead to a larger nuclear exchange?

      The only opposition comes from neo-cons and other bomb throwers who want to take us back to a Cold War past.

    2. Thanks, U.S. Representatives for doing the right thing, ensuring America's security.

    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.

    ×