Big Problem, Small Package

New START is a good step forward for limiting strategic nuclear weapons, but the proliferation and deployment of tactical nukes is a serious, and unaddressed, problem.

BY MICAH ZENKO | DECEMBER 22, 2010

As the New START treaty limped through the tortuous Senate ratification process, its Republican opponents threw a unique roadblock in its path: They complained that the treaty failed to reduce the number of "tactical" nuclear weapons -- low-yield warheads intended for short range applications or even battlefield use -- maintained by the United States and Russia. Sen. James Risch (R-Idaho) purportedly in an effort to remedy this problem, proposed an amendment that would have added a mention of tactical nukes in the treaty's preamble.

Risch's amendment was little more than a political ploy -- its only practical effect would have been to kill New START by sending it back to another round of negotiations with the Russians -- which treaty supporters soundly defeated. However, Risch inadvertently touched on a critical issue: Tactical nukes do represent a significant national security concern, and negotiators should press for a limit on the number of warheads in the next round of U.S.-Russian negotiations.

Russia's alleged deployment of tactical nuclear weapons to the borders of NATO set off alarm bells as recently as this spring. And for all of President Dmitry Medvedev's rhetoric about security cooperation at last month's NATO summit, Russia's vast tactical nuclear arsenal remains cloaked in secrecy. This isn't simply an arcane issue that concerns only arms-control wonks: Moscow sees these weapons as a counterbalance to NATO's conventional superiority in Europe.

Tactical nuclear weapons have not been included in a U.S.-Russia nuclear treaty since the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF). As such, it has been difficult to know just how many of these weapons exist and where they are.

Although exact numbers are murky, the disparity between the U.S. and Russian arsenals is arresting. The United States reportedly has 400 operationally deployed tactical nuclear weapons and an equal number in inactive reserve. Russia's tactical nuclear arsenal, on the other hand, is estimated at a whopping 2,000 operationally deployed weapons, with another 3,400 in inactive reserve. They are maintained either in operationally deployed status at nuclear-certified military bases, or in inactive reserve status at permanent storage sites.

The U.S. tactical nuke arsenal in Europe represents little more than a political symbol of America's commitment to its NATO allies. As one Pentagon official told me: "There are no war plans in NATO for using them." According to an October 2009 NATO backgrounder, the requirements for making the aircraft intended to deliver U.S. tactical nuclear weapons ready for their missions "are now being measured in months." It is no wonder that several European states, such as Germany, Belgium, and Norway, see NATO's non strategic arsenal as so extraneous that they support its removal, assuming that Russia agrees to commensurate cuts in its arsenal.

The U.S. tactical nuclear commitment to NATO has already decreased markedly since the end of the Cold War, with the number of U.S. tactical nukes falling from 4,000 in 1990 to some 200 today.  These remaining weapons are supplemented by the United States' significant strategic nuclear arsenal, as well as approximately 300 French and 225 British nuclear weapons.

Moscow, in contrast, sees its tactical nuclear weapons as a strategic necessity. This view is articulated in its military doctrine to deter nuclear attacks or conventional attacks that threaten the "very existence" of Russia. Last year, a senior Russian Navy official declared that "tactical nuclear weapons [on submarines] will play a key role in the future," adding that "their range and precision are gradually increasing."

Although the use of tactical nukes remains unlikely, their presence in Europe is dangerous. The tactical nuclear weapons maintained by the United States, and especially by Russia, represent a heightened risk of theft or diversion. In 2008, a U.S. Air Force report -- challenged by some Pentagon officials -- warned that most NATO nuclear sites "require significant additional resources to meet [Department of Defense] security requirements." In January, activists breached the perimeter of a Belgian air base, where perhaps 10 to 20 tactical nuclear weapons are stored, and walked around for over an hour without being questioned.

PHILIPPE LOPEZ/AFP/Getty Images

 

Micah Zenko is a fellow in the Center for Preventive Action at the Council on Foreign Relations, and author of "Toward Deeper Reductions in U.S. and Russian Nuclear Weapons".

HENMO32

9:23 PM ET

December 22, 2010

Hey there, I find an

Hey there, I find an amazing

Hey there, I find an amazing web,please click the web ,you can find big pleasantly surprised
???WELCOME http://www.goshops.org
----- ~ ¤ ??? ???
???????????? HANDBAG 35$
,????,''?~~ ,''~?
???? ???? SHOES 35$
?????????? CLOTH 15$
?????????????? 2010 NEW

 

MALICEIT

10:24 PM ET

December 22, 2010

RE:

"The tactical nuclear weapons maintained by the United States, and especially by Russia, represent a heightened risk of theft or diversion. In 2008, a U.S. Air Force report -- challenged by some Pentagon officials -- warned that most NATO nuclear sites "require significant additional resources to meet [Department of Defense] security requirements." In January, activists breached the perimeter of a Belgian air base, where perhaps 10 to 20 tactical nuclear weapons are stored, and walked around for over an hour without being questioned. "

They are secret for a reason. Besides i don't think those activists even knew that there were nukes...

"First, each country should reveal its tactical nuclear weapons inventory, location, and operational status, publicly or through a private data-exchange mechanism."

Also launch codes for 5113 American nukes, NORAD operational servers and data clusters, and promise that no one will know about it...

"Verifying limits on Russia's operational tactical nuclear arsenal would be challenging because of the inherent secrecy of the Ministry of Defense and armed services."

Because uhmarica still lives in Cold War.

 

SOUTHTEXASSHAMAN

9:25 AM ET

December 23, 2010

Edward C. Eiland

The blind are leading the blind, and both shall fall into the ditch…
The satanic, dead “churches” are not preparing the masses for the enormity of the prophesied, and pre-ordained, Last Days, which are now upon us, and Jesus’ necessitated, fierce physical Return. Pray for the young- they are about to inherit Armageddon.
To these evil men and women, -channels for Satan- in high places, I would say: Every moment, Jesus is watching you (the coming Messiah and King- He's invisible, for now). He’ll remind you of it later.
Ed, South Texas Shaman (http://southtexasshaman.tripod.com)