President Obama apparently has decided to gamble our nation’s security with what we think is a dangerous fundamental change to our nuclear weapons policy.
We appreciate the focus his plans, unveiled this week, have on diplomacy. The president’s desire to reduce nuclear stockpiles that could be used with disastrous effect by the likes of al-Qaeda also is reasonable.
But we don’t understand why the president has overruled his own defense secretary on the development of new nuclear weapons and seemingly weakened America’s defense without gaining anything tangible in return.
Obama has redirected America’s so-called Nuclear Posture in ways that reduce the arsenal’s effectiveness as a deterrent. Under the new posture, we’ve promised the world that our military will not use nuclear weapons even against a country that attacked us with chemical or biological weapons.
Such a change is a big departure from the traditional fog-of-war ambiguity about what would trigger a nuclear response. The point of maintaining that ambiguity was to keep potential enemies off balance and peaceful.
Even if a president never intends to use nuclear weapons, he shouldn’t announce it to the world.
There are caveats to his plan. Obama’s promise only extends to countries that join the international Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty and abide by its rules. And a significant attack could mean that America reevaluates its no-nukes stance.
Obama’s hope is that by removing the fear of nuclear retaliation and aggression, other countries won’t build or expand nuclear stockpiles. And by promising to treat differently those countries that follow the nonproliferation guidelines, Obama hopes to lure Iran and North Korea away from their risky pursuits.
There may be a glimmer of promise there, but Obama’s plan goes much further. Moving forward, our nation will not invest in further research and advancement of atomic weapons.
Obama’s plans are to dramatically reduce the nuclear arsenal. That has been the goal of several presidents, but not with the idea that the remaining missiles or bombs would never be upgraded or modernized.
Meanwhile, nothing is preventing Russia or China from continuing research and development, though Obama seeks to use the new posture to convince those countries to also reduce their arsenals.
It seems beyond odd that a president of our innovative country would actually call for a stop in research and development — even in the case of devastating weapons that no reasonable person ever wishes will be used.
Besides allowing other nations the opportunity to match our technology, ceasing new development ensures that America won’t discover innovations that could prove useful in other fields.
Our commander in chief should balance his diplomatic goals with a real-world commitment to protecting our nation and our allies.
