News

from LA Times

March 9, 2002   

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

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.