Agence France Presse March 15, 2002
US may have to abandon nuclear test moratorium: review
By Maxim Kniazkov
The United States may have to abandon an international moratorium on nuclear testing to make way for development of a new generation of bunker-busting nuclear weapons, according to excerpts from a nuclear posture review made public here Thursday.
The review, which also raises the possibility of US nuclear strikes against presently non-nuclear nations pursuing weapons of mass destruction, has been widely publicized by the media and commented on by administration officials over the past week.
But its publication on the Internet by GlobalSecurity.org, a Washington think tank, marks the first time the document has been presented to the public in its raw, albeit abridged, form.
"While the United States is making every effort to maintain the stockpile without additional nuclear testing, this may not be possible for the indefinite future," warned Defense Department strategists, who called for a new nuclear triad "to meet the nation's defense goals in the 21st century." They pointed out that some problems in the US nuclear stockpile due to aging and manufacturing defects of the weapons have already been identified.
"Increasingly, objective judgments about capability in a non-testing environment will become far more difficult," pointed out the authors of the review that the Pentagon submitted to Congress in January.
The United States has maintained a moratorium on nuclear tests since 1992, along with Britain, China, France and Russia.
Only India and Pakistan tested nuclear weapons in 1998, signaling their entry into the "nuclear club."
With US planes pounding suspected al-Qaeda-occupied caves in Afghanistan, the document reveals the Pentagon's concern that an increasing number of countries and hostile groups rely on deep underground facilities to hide their weaponry and command posts.
According to the Defense Intelligence Agency, at least 10,000 such bunkers currently exist in over 70 countries.
More than 1,400 of them are used as strategic storage sites for weapons of mass destruction, concealed launch pads for ballistic missiles as well as leadership or top echelon command and control posts, the DIA estimates.
"At present the United States lacks adequate means to deal with these strategic facilities," the review admits.
The answer, in the US military's view, lies in developing and testing a new generation of smaller but more effective nuclear weapons, capable of destroying these underground facilities.
"Today's nuclear arsenal continues to reflect its Cold War origin, characterized by moderate delivery accuracy, limited earth penetrator capability, high yield warheads, silo and sea based ballistic missiles with multiple independent reentry vehicles, and limited retargeting capability," the authors of the review lament.
"New capabilities must be developed to defeat emerging threats such as hard and deeply buried targets ... to find and attack mobile and relocatable targets, to defeat chemical or biological agents, and to improve accuracy and limit collateral damage," they argue.
The review projects the United States will have between 1,700 and 2,200 "operationally deployed" strategic nuclear warheads by 2012, which is in line with arms reduction proposals put forward by President George W. Bush.
It leaves open the possibility, however, that up to 3,000 warheads could be transferred into storage and, therefore, would be available in case of emergency.
But the most controversial elements are contained in the section dealing with national security contingencies, for which, according to the document, the administration must be prepared "in setting requirements for nuclear strike capabilities."
"Current examples of immediate contingencies include an Iraqi attack on Israel or its neighbors, a North Korean attack on South Korea, or a military confrontation over the status of Taiwan," the review states.
It remains unclear, however, whether Israel, South Korea and Taiwan have now been officially taken under the US nuclear umbrella.
North Korea, Iraq, Iran, Syria, and Libya could become immediate contingencies because of their "longstanding hostility toward the United States and its security partners," the Pentagon said.
China is seen as a potential target due to its "ongoing modernization of its nuclear and non nuclear forces," while Russia remains a concern because it has "many strategic problems around its periphery and its future course cannot be charted with certainty."
Copyright © 2002
