Global Security Newswire

The U.S. Defense Department has received an Obama administration directive to consider if it is possible to make even deeper cuts to the nation's nuclear deterrent than those mandated by a new strategic arms control treaty with Russia, the Associated Press reported on Wednesday (see GSN, Feb. 14).

President Obama called for the classified Pentagon-headed study toward the beginning of 2010, but the assessment was initiated not long ago, Defense Department spokeswoman Lt. Col. April Cunningham said. The study is not anticipated to be finished until late 2011.

The review is expected to address the range of locations that would need to be targeted by U.S. nuclear weapons in the worst imaginable situation and the deterrent the United States would need in order to strike those sites. A new understanding of these demands might lead to further nuclear force reductions.

Some conservative lawmakers have already come out against the review. Forty-one GOP senators, in a letter delivered on Tuesday, cautioned Obama against ordering big changes to the deterrent without conferring with Capitol Hill. Significant cuts to the nuclear arsenal "would have important and as yet unknown consequences for nuclear stability," the lawmakers said.

Senator Jon Kyl (R-Ariz.), who came out strongly against New START Senate ratification late last year, distributed the letter.

The newly implemented U.S.-Russian accord requires the two former antagonists to each limit their deployed strategic nuclear warheads to 1,550, down from a ceiling of 2,200 required by next year under an earlier treaty. The treaty also caps the number of fielded strategic delivery platforms to 700, with another 100 permitted in reserve.

The GOP letter states that any failure by Obama to confer with congressional lawmakers on possible notable revisions to U.S. deterrent policy could jeopardize ratification of any new U.S.-Russian nuclear treaty. Several of the 41 senators who signed the letter voted to ratify New START. Senate treaty ratifications require a minimum of 67 votes.

Obama has said he would like negotiations with Moscow on a treaty to limit deployed tactical nuclear arms to begin by next February. However, there is no sign that the review would lead to sharp arsenal reductions. The study, though, could influence new negotiations with Russia, according to AP.

The Obama administration in its 2010 Nuclear Posture Review highlighted the necessity of preserving a credible nuclear deterrent (see GSN, April 8, 2010).

"The United States will continue to ensure that, in the calculations of any potential opponent, the perceived gains of attacking the United States or its allies and partners would be far outweighed by the unacceptable costs of the response," the Nuclear Posture Review stated.

Disarmament supporters, however, argue Washington remains stuck in a Cold War mindset. They say a determination on whether to order additional arsenal reductions would be a test of Obama's sincerity on his stated dream of worldwide nuclear disarmament.

"We shouldn't have to dump 60 hydrogen bombs on Odessa to ensure U.S. nuclear security," Ploughshares Fund President Joseph Cirincione said. "This review will determine whether the president is serious about moving toward deep reductions and the elimination of nuclear weapons or if he is giving up on that vision."

Still, arms control advocates do not see the review resulting in speedy and significant arsenal reductions.

"For better or worse, it's not in the cards," Arms Control Association head Daryl Kimball said (Desmond Butler, Associated Press/Yahoo!News, March 23).

Meanwhile, an informed Russian source on Tuesday said that U.S.-Russian negotiations on tactical nuclear arms drawdowns might not begin until the United States has already withdrawn its deployed short-range systems from Europe, Interfax reported.

The United States over the years has significantly reduced the number of tactical nuclear arms it fields in NATO states, from a Cold War high of more than 7,300 warheads to an estimated 200 weapons today at military bases in Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey, analysts say (see GSN, July 21, 2010). In comparison, Moscow is projected to possess approximately 2,000 deployed battlefield nuclear weapons within its borders (see GSN, Feb. 8).

"Before starting talks the United States must withdraw tactical nuclear weapons, currently deployed in European countries, to its national territory," the unidentified diplomatic-military source said in Moscow.

Negotiations also need to consider the present advantage the United States possesses in conventional weaponry, including its precision weapons. "The United States and NATO countries' superiority in these weapons could be minimized by an adapted Conventional Forces in Europe Treaty," the insider said.

"Anyway, concrete talks on tactical nuclear arms can only be launched after an adapted CFE treaty takes effect," the source said. He added that the international strategic situation must not be undermined by reducing deployment of tactical nuclear weapons (Interfax I, March 22).

In Washington, Assistant Secretary of State Rose Gottemoeller, who led the Obama administration's negotiating team in New START negotiations, said that future U.S.-Russian arms control talks should emphasize battlefield weapons and nondeployed systems, Interfax reported.

In pursuing tactical arms reductions, the United States will need to be in close alignment with NATO, Gottemoeller said (Interfax II, March 22).