add to facebook
ICBMs Are the Bomb
Travis | Nov 17, 2009 |
0 
Ok, but what about the Far-Far-Term?
Chaired by Senators Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota) and Michael Enzi (R-Wyoming), the Senate ICBM Coalition is comprised of senators who represent states that host, maintain, or administer ICBM forces and/or operations. On November 6, the Coalition released “The Long Pole of the Nuclear Umbrella,” a report that argues in support of maintaining the current U.S. force of 450 ICBMs.
The report’s executive summary states...
ICBMs are the most stabilizing part of the triad.
- Through widely dispersed locations, ICBMs pose an insurmountable challenge to any adversary and assure a credible response to any attack.
- ICBMs protect the survivability of the other legs of the triad. While bombers offer forward capabilities and submarines offer high survivability, the number and dispersion of ICBMs act as a critical deterrent for a disarming attack on these two legs of the triad.
- The obvious visible permanence of ICBMs offers the greatest assurance to our allies, which in turn decreases the likelihood they pursue their own nuclear arsenals.
- ICBMs represent the most cost-effective delivery system the United States possesses. Maintaining nuclear submarine and bomber technology will require continued significant investments. ICBMs have already been modernized to 2020 and will require only incremental investment to reach 2030.
ICBMs best achieve these effects under two conditions: we maintain a minimum number of 450 geographically dispersed ICBMs, and we arm each with only a single warhead.
There is no inconsistency between maintaining an ICBM force of 450 missiles and pursuing a follow-on to the START treaty that codifies the gains we have made and hope to make in reducing our reliance on nuclear weapons.
This is a well-written report with illustrative quotations from validators across the ideological spectrum. Its support for a New START that doesn’t reduce ICBMs, which may be the way things are headed, is noteworthy if less than inspiring. Some of its arguments (listed above) in support of the strategic value of ICBMs are pretty solid.
The key question, however, is whether the United States really needs 450 missiles to preserve the strategic value of its ICBM force – or whether a lesser number will suffice.
The report makes the case for maintaining the current 450 missile force by casting doubt on the other legs of the triad. The report asserts that SLBMs “could be quietly attrited over time or drastically depleted with very limited attacks on just a handful of aimpoints.” While the surprise attack possibility seems implausible enough in practice to cautiously set aside, the prospect of inconclusive attribution merited previous discussion here at NOH. The report also raises the “all our eggs in one basket” specter by observing that U.S. strategic bombers are “located at only three continental bases” and thus could theoretically be destroyed by a first strike on very few targets.
In contrast to the tightly-bundled deployments of SLBMs and bombers, the report reassuringly observes that Russia would have to expend nearly two-thirds of its nuclear arsenal to destroy the dispersed U.S. ICBM force (i.e. 2 warheads launched at each ICBM X 450 ICBMs = 900 warheads, which is 60 percent of the proposed New START lower limit of 1,500 warheads per side).
Stretching its advocacy as far as it can go, the report’s section on survivability concludes that “Since our ICBMs pose an insurmountable challenge, no adversary has or is inclined to embark on a focused effort to solve the problem of finding submarines.” In other words, ICBMs rule and SLBMs drool.
When force structure cuts are in the offing, nuclear triad stakeholders in Congress, the Services, and private industry are guaranteed to kick sand in the eyes of the competition. The Senate ICBM Coalition has been a leading actor in this ongoing bureaucratic battle. If “The Long Pole in the Nuclear Umbrella” is any indication, this collection of senators will be a force to be reckoned with when it comes time to ratify New START next year.
Nukes on a Blog, Congress, START, Posture Review, Senate, New START (all tags)
|
ICBMs Are the Bomb | 0 Comments | Post a Comment
|
In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.
If not, you can make an account by clicking right here. It's quick and free.
