Statement from NTI CEO Ernest J. Moniz on President Trump’s Remarks on Nuclear Testing

On October 29, President Trump stated on social media that he has directed the Pentagon to “start testing our nuclear weapons on an equal basis.” It is unclear whether that instruction includes the resumption of explosive nuclear testing at the Nevada National Security Site, which is the only site suitable today for carrying out such tests. The “equal basis” statement in the President’s posting would seem to focus on Russia’s recent tests of new nuclear weapons delivery systems rather than nuclear explosive tests, since neither Russia nor China has carried out such explosive tests since the 1990s. Assignment of the task to the Pentagon rather than the Department of Energy might also suggest the intent to test delivery systems rather than the bombs themselves.

However, if explosive testing were to resume, it would mark the end of a three-decade-long moratorium on U.S. nuclear testing. Testing nuclear weapons is unnecessary for U.S. national security, unwise because it will invite our adversaries to do the same, and unwelcome in communities close to the test site.

President Trump’s post has likely sown confusion among allies and adversaries seeking to interpret its implications—especially nuclear-armed states weighing potential responses. Such uncertainty in nuclear weapons use policy is dangerous under any circumstances, but it is particularly problematic when tensions are high and relations are strained, as is the case among the United States, Russia, and China.

In this context, it is critical that the leaders of all three countries reaffirm their commitment to the norm against explosive nuclear testing and take concrete steps to restore substantive dialogue on nuclear weapons policy to reduce the risk of catastrophic miscalculation.

For 33 years, all U.S. presidents, including President Trump during his first term, preserved the moratorium on explosive nuclear testing because they understood testing would do more harm than good to U.S. national security. The same logic applies today:

• It is unnecessary. The directors of U.S. national laboratories responsible for nuclear weapons, the commander of U.S. Strategic Command, and the Secretaries of Energy and of Defense have certified every year since 1996 that there is no scientific, technical, or military need to resume explosive testing.
• It is unwise. If the United States were to resume explosive nuclear testing, Russia, China, and possibly other countries would almost certainly follow suit. U.S. adversaries have more to gain by a resumption of nuclear explosive testing than the United States because of their more limited test history and experimental and computer simulation capabilities.
• It is unwelcome. Earlier this year, concerns about the adverse economic, environmental, and health consequences of explosive testing motivated the Nevada state legislature to pass a unanimous, bipartisan resolution opposing any resumption of nuclear explosive testing at the Nevada test site. It is also worth noting that considerable time would be needed to prepare the site for an explosive test. Communities in Nevada and elsewhere in the U.S. Southwest are keenly aware of the risks; many are still suffering from the harmful effects of past tests.

Given the President’s commendable steadfast record of speaking out on the catastrophic risks of nuclear weapons and his stated ambition to engage in efforts toward “denuclearization,” NTI urges the administration to support the U.S. national interest by not being the first major power to resume explosive nuclear testing after a multidecadal testing moratorium. By doing so, the President can demonstrate global leadership, reduce the risk of a dangerous and expensive arms race, and help forge a legacy that will serve U.S. and international security for decades to come.