Why America Needs a Better Nuclear Weapons Strategy
Can the United States achieve sufficient deterrence with fewer resources invested into nuclear weapons? Probably not.
Former leaders of the U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) are encouraging the U.S. to “revamp and revitalize” its nuclear deterrent. The remarks, made during an AFA Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies webinar, were in response to calls for the U.S. to reduce its nuclear arsenal, perhaps even cutting a leg of the air-land-sea triad.
Nuclear Deterrence Requires Serious Thought
Retired Air Force General Kevin P. Chilton believes that critics of the nuclear triad have become complacent with respect to the nuclear threat that other countries pose. “We just kind of brush aside the fact that these weapons are so devastating and are in fact an existential threat to the country,” Chilton said. “I mean—tear up the Constitution, back to an agrarian society, throw away everything in history since 1776.”
Chilton is correct, in that nuclear weapons pose an existential threat to the United States. But how many weapons, and how many delivery systems are truly needed to ensure deterrence? Understanding the certain suicide of nuclear war, no nation has deployed a nuclear weapon since 1945. In that sense, deterrence measures are working worldwide. But where is the threshold for sufficient deterrence? Since deterrence is binomial in a sense—an adversary is either deterred or they aren’t—deterrence can be hard to quantify.
The United States is currently believed to possess 5,044 nuclear warheads, but is this the magic number? No one can say for certain how much more vulnerable America would be if this number were 4,000, or even 3,000. Of course, many of the critiques being levied at American nuclear strategy relate to posture and method rather than quantity alone.
Yet the question is worth asking: can the United States achieve sufficient deterrence with fewer resources invested into nuclear weapons? No one knows for sure—but many of the people who formerly orchestrated U.S. nuclear deterrence believe the answer is no.
America Can’t Be Afraid of Nuclear Weapons
The Russian invasion of Ukraine, and increased Chinese assertiveness in the Indo-Pacific, have helped to inspire the ex-STRATCOM member’s bullishness on nuclear deterrence.
“Just imagine, on the day the Russians invaded Ukraine, if we had removed ICBMs, if we had withdrawn our nuclear forces from Europe, if we had restricted the number of [nuclear submarines] we were putting at sea, if we had significantly, unilaterally reduced the number of weapons, et cetera, et cetera,” Chilton observed. “We hadn’t done any of that. And I think the United States was in a much better place on that day than we would have been otherwise.”
Retired Navy Admiral Charles Richard, former head of STRATCOM, “suggested the conflict shows why the U.S. needs a stronger nuclear deterrent than what it has now,” Air & Space Forces Magazine reported. For example, Richard explained, the U.S. Air Force should move some of its bomber fleet to alert status, which has not happened since the conclusion of the Cold War.
In addition to Russia’s aggressiveness, China’s ever-increasing military abilities are changing the geopolitical calculus. According to Admiral Richard, China’s emergence is facilitating the rise of a “three-peer world,” arguing that bipolar world orders are more stable than three-polar world orders. That’s true—and the consequences for world order in the 21st century are ominous. But is Russia really a peer? Certainly not economically. If nuclear capability is what makes it a peer, couldn’t one say the same of France, Israel, and the United Kingdom—making for a truly multi-polar world order?
The point is maybe moot. The real point is that there are vital questions to ask before forging ahead, out of habit, with increased nuclear deterrent spending.
About the Author: Harrison Kass
Harrison Kass is a senior defense and national security writer with over 1,000 total pieces on issues involving global affairs. An attorney, pilot, guitarist, and minor pro hockey player, Harrison joined the US Air Force as a Pilot Trainee but was medically discharged. Harrison holds a BA from Lake Forest College, a JD from the University of Oregon, and an MA from New York University. Harrison listens to Dokken.
Image: Shutterstock / Eric Poulin.