|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
Pentagon Panel Recommends Deploying Lower-Yield Nuclear Weapons
A U.S. Defense Department advisory group report has urged the United States to deploy a range of lower-yield nuclear weapons to make the U.S. nuclear deterrent “more relevant to the threat environment,” Jane’s Defense Weekly reported today. In an unreleased report completed this summer and entitled Future Strategic Strike Forces, the Defense Science Board says the current U.S. nuclear arsenal “is not adequate to (meet) future national security needs,” because potential enemies believe U.S. weapon yields are too large to use. Smaller weapons would reduce collateral damage and make their possible use more credible, the report says. The recommendation does not address the current legislative controversy over researching new low-yield nuclear weapons as the report’s plan simply calls for lowering the yields of existing weapons, but not below the five-kiloton threshold that defines a mini-nuke (see GSN, July 17). The new arsenal sought by the report would include “special effects” nuclear weapons, such as ones with a greater electromagnetic pulse or enhanced neutron weapons. Because these weapons would be derived from existing types, they would not require any explosive testing, the report says. The report also calls for creating more non-nuclear strike options, including some that could use existing nuclear weapons delivery vehicles. For example, MX strategic missiles, now scheduled to be removed from the nuclear arsenal, could be redeployed with conventional warheads at Vandenburg Air Force Base in California and Cape Canaveral, Fla., said Dennis Blair, a former U.S. Navy admiral who co-chaired the panel that produced the report. Non-nuclear weapons are needed to attack “very hard-to-hit, small, mobile and concealed targets at greater distances” than can be threatened now, Blair said. The MX plan would cost $350 million to develop, $600 million to deploy and could be ready by 2010, the report says. In addition, the report recommends developing an intermediate-range submarine-launched ballistic missile that would be armed with a conventional warhead (Andrew Koch, Jane’s Defense Weekly, Oct. 22).
| ||||||||||
Back to top
