Trump Admin. Outlines New Nuclear Policy to Counter Russia

The Pentagon-led review of the US nuclear arsenal and the policies that govern it was ordered by Trump a year ago.

"There is no evidence that nuclear weapons are becoming more prominent in China's military strategy or that China has changed its longstanding no-first-use policy", Kulacki said.

When the Obama administration did its own reset of the strategy in 2010, it argued the world could be made safer if the US reduced the role of nuclear weapons in defense strategy.

Jim Mattis became defense secretary a year ago, he arrived at the Pentagon with reservations about the USA nuclear arsenal.

The nuclear-weapons policy the Pentagon chief's team rolled out this past week offered full-throated support for the military's current and planned nuclear capabilities, including the new cruise missile and the ICBM fleet he once questioned.

"On the contrary", Mattis said, the nuclear strategy reaffirms the role of nuclear weapons in national defense "while underscoring continued US commitment to non-proliferation, to counter nuclear terrorism and to arms control".

Mistrust of Russian intentions was reflected on Friday in a Nuclear Posture Review released by the Pentagon that called for a revamp of the USA nuclear arsenal and development of new low-yield atomic weapons. He said he recently received a letter from senators expressing concern that the nuclear strategy would undermine traditional US leadership on efforts to reduce and eventually eliminate nuclear weapons.

The treaty signed by president Barack Obama was aimed at ushering in a new era in US-Russian relations and promoting the goal of doing away with nuclear arms.

Russia, Iran, and China have strongly criticized Washington's newly revealed policy plan to expand US nuclear weapons capabilities in order to deter other countries.

"This is a very mainstream nuclear policy", Miller added.

The United States would spend $1.2 trillion over the next 30 years on the nuclear weapons. For example, the policy calls for "the rapid development" of a cruise missile that would be fired from submarines, then become airborne before reaching its target.

Russian Federation has violated another treaty, the United States argues, that covers intermediate-range missiles, and is "building a large, diverse and modern" set of shorter-range weapons with less powerful warheads that "are not accountable under the New START treaty treaty". Most of that money would go to new generations of bombers and new submarines, and a rebuilding of the land-based nuclear missile force that still dots giant fields across the West. We have plenty of low-yield weapons. "Were Iran to decide to acquire nuclear weapons, pressures on other countries in the region to acquire their own nuclear weapons would increase", it said.

Among the fiscal needs, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would be: (1) $313 billion for a new ballistic missile submarine capable of firing nuclear missiles from beneath the ocean surface; (2) $149 billion for a new silo-based intercontinental ballistic missile; and (3) $266 billion for a new B-21 Stealth bomber.

Russian Federation on Monday said it has met the nuclear-arsenal limits of a key arms-control treaty, but it raised some issues with how the United States has sought to comply with the 2010 accord.

  • Rogelio Becker