UNITED24 - Make a charitable donation in support of Ukraine!

Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)

11 March 2003

Feinstein Says U.S. Must Not Sanction First Use of Nuclear Arms

(Senator says such an action could provoke weapons proliferation) (1130)
The United States should never sanction the first use of nuclear
weapons because such an action could serve as a pretext for other
nations or terrorist organizations to use such weapons against the
United States, says a member of the Senate's Select Committee on
Intelligence.
Nuclear planning by the United States "could serve as a pretext for
other countries and, worse, terrorist groups such as al-Qaida, to
build or acquire their own bombs," Senator Dianne Feinstein (Democrat
of California) warned Senate colleagues in remarks March 10.
Feinstein said that if the United States is not careful, "our own
nuclear posture could provoke the very nuclear-proliferation
activities we are seeking to prevent."
The Pyongyang regime "apparently believes the United States may be
planning nuclear strikes of its own," she said, noting that on March 1
North Korea "warned that a war on the Korean peninsula would quickly
'escalate into a nuclear war.'"
Feinstein, who is the ranking minority member on the Senate Judiciary
Subcommittee on Technology and Terrorism, said there have been reports
that "tactical nuclear weapons, particularly 'bunker busters,' have
been considered by Pentagon planners in the context of the escalating
nuclear crisis with North Korea."
Many American analysts also believe there is "a great danger that
North Korea, if its survival was at stake, would be willing to sell
its nuclear arsenal to the highest bidder," according to Feinstein.
Feinstein, who also serves on the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee
on Defense, cited a 1967 study by U.S. scientists who recommended
against the use of tactical nuclear weapons by the United States in
the Vietnam War.
"The bottom line of the study is that the use of nuclear weapons in
Vietnam -- to block the Ho Chi Minh trail, kill large numbers of enemy
soldiers, or destroy North Vietnamese air bases and seaports -- would
have offered no decisive military advantages to the United States but
would have had grave repercussions for U.S. soldiers in the field and
U.S. interests around the world," she said.
Their findings should give current Pentagon war planners pause, she
said.
Following is the text of Feinstein's March 10 remarks from the
Congressional Record:
(begin text)
RELEASE OF VIETNAM NUCLEAR WEAPONS REPORT
Senate
March 10, 2003
Mrs. FEINSTEIN. Mr. President, in the mid-1960s, during the height of
the Vietnam War, the Department of Defense commissioned a study to
determine the feasibility and advisability of the use of tactical
nuclear weapons in that conflict. A copy of that 1967 study, "Tactical
Nuclear Weapons in Southeast Asia", has just been declassified, and
lays out in terrifying detail what might have happened if the United
States had used tactical nuclear weapons during the Vietnam war.
The bottom line of the study is that the use of nuclear weapons in
Vietnam -- to block the Ho Chi Minh trail, kill large numbers of enemy
soldiers, or destroy North Vietnamese air bases and seaports -- would
have offered no decisive military advantages to the United States but
would have had grave repercussions for US soldiers in the field and US
interests around the world.
The study was prepared by four physicists associated with the Jason
Division of the Institute of Defense Analyses, a group of scientists
who met frequently to provide classified advice to defense officials.
The study's conclusions were presented to then-Secretary of Defense
Robert McNamara.
"The political effects of US first use of TNW (tactical nuclear
weapons) in Vietnam would be uniformly bad and could be catastrophic,"
the scientists wrote.
They warned that US first-use of tactical nuclear weapons could lead
China or the Soviet Union to provide similar weapons to the Viet Cong
and North Vietnam, raising the possibility that US forces in Vietnam
"would be essentially annihilated" in retaliatory raids by
nuclear-armed guerrilla forces.
If that happened, they wrote, ``insurgent groups everywhere in the
world would take note and would try by all available means to acquire
TNW for themselves.'' First-use of nuclear weapons in Southeast Asia,
the scientists warned, was "likely to result in greatly increased
long-term risk of nuclear guerrilla operations in other parts of the
world," including attacks on the Panama Canal, oil pipelines and
storage facilities in Venezuela and the Israeli capital of Tel Aviv.
"US security would be gravely endangered if the use of TNW by
guerrilla forces should become widespread," they concluded.
Thirty-six years later some American officials are, according to press
reports, once again contemplating the use of nuclear weapons, and
seeking to repeal US prohibitions on the developments of smaller
nuclear weapons, including so-called "low-yield" bombs and
deep-penetration "bunker-busters."
Writing recently in the Los Angeles Times, military analyst William
Arkin disclosed the US Strategic Command in Omaha and the Joint Chiefs
of Staff are secretly drawing up nuclear target lists for Iraq.
"Target lists are being scrutinized, options are being pondered and
procedures are being tested to give nuclear armaments a role in the
new U.S. doctrine of 'preemption,'" Arkin reported.
There have also been reports that tactical nuclear weapons,
particularly "bunker busters," have been considered by Pentagon
planners in the context of the escalating nuclear crisis with North
Korea. Moreover, many US analysts believe there is a great danger that
North Korea, if its survival was at stake, would be willing to sell
its nuclear arsenal to the highest bidder.
North Korea itself apparently believes the United States may be
planning nuclear strikes of its own, and on March 1 warned that a war
on the Korean peninsula would quickly "escalate into a nuclear war."
I sincerely believe that any first use of nuclear weapons by the
United States cannot and should not be sanctioned. As the Jason
scientists argued in the 1960s, U.S. nuclear planning could serve as a
pretext for other countries and, worse, terrorist groups such as
al-Qaida, to build or acquire their own bombs. If we are not careful,
our own nuclear posture could provoke the very nuclear-proliferation
activities we are seeking to prevent.
This study, "Tactical Nuclear Weapons in Southeast Asia", was released
this past weekend by the Nautilus Institute of Berkeley, CA, and I
would urge those with an interest in reading it in full to contact
them directly.
The conclusions of the Jason report are as valid, realistic and
frightening today as they were in 1967. As we contemplate the future
course of our nation's national security policy, I believe that it is
important to look at past events, to learn from them, and to benefit
from the counsel of history.
(end text)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)



NEWSLETTER
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list