|
Bush nukes { March 9 2002 } Original Source Link: (May no longer be active)
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-030902bombs.storyhttp://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-030902bombs.story
U.S. Works Up Plan for Using
Nuclear Arms
Military: Administration, in a secret report,
calls for a strategy against at least seven
nations: China, Russia, Iraq, Iran, North
Korea, Libya and Syria.
By PAUL RICHTER
Times Staff Writer
March 9 2002
WASHINGTON -- The Bush administration has directed the military to
prepare contingency plans to use nuclear weapons against at least seven
countries and to build smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain battlefield
situations, according to a classified Pentagon report obtained by the Los
Angeles Times.
The secret report, which was provided to Congress on Jan. 8, says the
Pentagon needs to be prepared to use nuclear weapons against China,
Russia, Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Libya and Syria. It says the weapons could
be used in three types of situations: against targets able to withstand
nonnuclear attack; in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological or chemical
weapons; or "in the event of surprising military developments."
A partial copy of the report was obtained by defense analyst and Times
contributor William Arkin. His column on the contents appears in Sunday's
editions.
Officials have long acknowledged that they had detailed nuclear plans for an
attack on Russia. However, this "Nuclear Posture Review" apparently marks
the first time that an official list of potential target countries has come to light,
analysts said. Some predicted the disclosure would set off strong reactions
from governments of the target countries.
"This is dynamite," said Joseph Cirincione, a nuclear arms expert at the
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington. "I can imagine
what these countries are going to be saying at the U.N." Arms control
advocates said the report's directives on development of smaller nuclear
weapons could signal that the Bush administration is more willing to overlook
a long-standing taboo against the use of nuclear weapons except as a last
resort. They warned that such moves could dangerously destabilize the world
by encouraging other countries to believe that they, too, should develop
weapons.
"They're trying desperately to find new uses for nuclear weapons, when their
uses should be limited to deterrence," said John Isaacs, president of the
Council for a Livable World. "This is very, very dangerous talk . . . Dr.
Strangelove is clearly still alive in the Pentagon."
But some conservative analysts insisted that the Pentagon must prepare for all
possible contingencies, especially now, when dozens of countries, and some
terrorist groups, are engaged in secret weapon development programs.
They argued that smaller weapons have an important deterrent role because
many aggressors might not believe that the U.S. forces would use
multi-kiloton weapons that would wreak devastation on surrounding territory
and friendly populations.
"We need to have a credible deterrence against regimes involved in
international terrorism and development of weapons of mass destruction,"
said Jack Spencer, a defense analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation
in Washington. He said the contents of the report did not surprise him and
represent "the right way to develop a nuclear posture for a post-Cold War
world."
A spokesman for the Pentagon, Richard McGraw, declined to comment
because the document is classified.
Congress requested the reassessment of the U.S. nuclear posture in
September 2000. The last such review was conducted in 1994 by the Clinton
administration. The new report, signed by Secretary of Defense Donald H.
Rumsfeld, is now being used by the U.S. Strategic Command to prepare a
nuclear war plan.
Bush administration officials have publicly provided only sketchy details of the
nuclear review. They have publicly emphasized the parts of the policy
suggesting that the administration wants to reduce reliance on nuclear
weapons.
Since the Clinton administration's review is also classified, no specific contrast
can be drawn. However, analysts portrayed this report as representing a
break with earlier policy.
U.S. policymakers have generally indicated that the United States would not
use nuclear weapons against nonnuclear states unless they were allied with
nuclear powers. They have left some ambiguity about whether the United
States would use nuclear weapons in retaliation after strikes with chemical or
nuclear weapons.
The report says the Pentagon should be prepared to use nuclear weapons in
an Arab-Israeli conflict, in a war between China and Taiwan, or in an attack
from North Korea on the south. They might also become necessary in an
attack by Iraq on Israel or another neighbor, it said.
The report says Russia is no longer officially an "enemy." Yet it acknowledges
that the huge Russian arsenal, which includes about 6,000 deployed
warheads and perhaps 10,000 smaller "theater" nuclear weapons, remains of
concern.
Pentagon officials have said publicly that they were studying the need to
develop theater nuclear weapons, designed for use against specific targets on
a battlefield, but had not committed themselves to that course.
Officials have often spoken of the advantages of using nuclear weapons to
destroy the deep tunnel and cave complexes that many regimes have been
building, especially since the Persian Gulf War of 1991. Nuclear weapons
give off powerful shock waves that can crush structures deep in the Earth,
they point out.
Officials argue that large nuclear arms have so many destructive side effects,
from blast to heat and radiation, that they become "self-deterring." They
contend the Pentagon needs "full spectrum deterrence"--that is, a full range of
weapons that potential enemies believe might be used against them.
The Pentagon was actively involved in planning for use of tactical nuclear
weapons as recently as the 1970s. But it has moved away from them in the
last two decades.
Analysts said the report's reference to "surprising military developments"
referred to the Pentagon's fears that a rogue regime or terrorist group might
suddenly unleash a wholly unknown weapon that was difficult to counter with
the conventional U.S. arsenal.
The administration has proposed cutting the offensive nuclear arsenal by
about two-thirds, to between 1,700 and 2,200 missiles, within 10 years.
Officials have also said they want to use precision guided conventional
munitions in some missions that might have previously been accomplished
with nuclear arms.
But critics said the report contradicts suggestions the Bush administration
wants to cut the nuclear role.
"This clearly makes nuclear weapons a tool for fighting a war, rather than
deterring them," said Cirincione.
If you want other stories on this topic, search the Archives at
latimes.com/archives. For information about reprinting this article, go
to www.lats.com/rights.
|
|
