Bush Administration --
the pro-nuclear ideologues
By Sam Garman
Under the guise of "moving beyond the Cold War," a small but powerful contingent of officials in the Defense Department and a few other pro-nuclear ideologues in the Bush administration are attempting to lower the threshold for use of a nuclear weapon. For many years, through wars in Korea and Vietnam, the threshold has been high; that is to say, official policy has been against use in nearly all circumstances. Although the official line of the administration remains unchanged, the pro-nuclear camp is pushing the administration subtly away from its public position.
The shift involves both a move toward the creation of a "usable" nuclear weapon and a move away from past commitments never to be the initiator of a nuclear strike and never to use a nuclear weapon against a non-nuclear state. This change in policy arises from the administration's belief that the United States faces a new kind of enemy in the twenty-first century, the so-called "rogue" or "outlaw" state which may also be a source or a sponsor of terrorism. However, as the New York Times has accurately noted, the new nuclear posture of the U.S. itself is quite roguish in character.
Preparation for this new nuclear posture would involve the resumption of nuclear testing, and either the design and construction of a new nuclear weapon or the retrofitting of a nuclear weapon from the current US arsenal for tactical use. These actions, if carried out by Iraq, Iran, or North Korea, would result in immediate military action by the U.S.; our president has said as much.
Proponents of testing and the development of new nuclear weapons argue that doing these things will make the US more secure; they also point to the tremendous cost of maintaining the current US arsenal, while other nations engage in active production. But the high nuclear threshold was not conceived to provide security for only the US (economic or otherwise); it was conceived, in effect, to make the best of a bad situation (the presence of nuclear weapons in the world) by protecting every person on earth from whoever it was that had nuclear weapons. The enormous stigma attached to the use of a nuclear weapon is intended to benefit all people, everywhere. But instead of submitting to generally accepted limitations on arsenals of weapons of mass destruction with all the other nations of the world, the US now seeks not only to rise above them, but to become absolutely the most powerful nation on earth.
But the US will certainly not be alone in this pursuit. Every nuclear-capable nation on earth has people in positions of power who favor a robust nuclear arsenal. Any nuclear test or new nuclear development by the US would result in similar behavior emanating from Moscow and Beijing. Or it may be someone else. But no one seriously believes that all other nations of the world will watch idly while the US becomes the supreme nuclear power on earth.
Proponents of a vital, productive, renewable US nuclear arsenal seem to believe that they can create an arsenal that will provide absolute security. Even if such a thing were possible, it would not be right. No country should seek or hold destructive power of this kind. The United States must not appoint itself the only nation allowed to use nuclear weapons; the arrogance evident in such a policy rises to the level of obscenity.
Sam Garman is an intern at the Friends Committee on National Legislation <http://www.fcnl.org>, a Quaker lobby in the public interest. He is also Sally and Bob's nephew.