LLAW’s All Things Nuclear #714, Tuesday, (08/06/2024)
“End Nuclear Insanity Before Nuclear Insanity Ends Humanity”
Between 1946 and 1958, the United States detonated 67 nuclear and thermonuclear weapons
LLAW’s NUCLEAR ISSUES & COMMENTS, Tuesday, (08/06/2024)
This article describes exactly why ‘deterrence’ is a ‘time constrained’ non-agreement treaty, or pact, but a ‘power-game of thrones’ to instead simply build bigger, more powerful, and more kinds of nuclear weapons of mass destruction. I’ve said it dozens of times in this blog that such an international policy among nuclear armed nations will fail sooner or later, so what is the point of ‘deterrence’ at all? Deterrence is a game played by bullys on grade school playgrounds. Perhaps it delays WWIII for a few more days, months, or years, but at a global financial cost that is almost as destructive as the idea of ‘build but never use' more powerful nuclear arms, including additions to the popular ‘triad’ concept. The only way to survive nuclear weapons and nuclear power plants is to, as a united world, “do away” with ‘all things nuclear’ . . .
What the hell is wrong with us? I mean wrong with Humanity, of which we are all a part! We say, as Pulitzer Prize winner Mr. Pincus points out clearly in this article, “why do we continue to prepare for a nuclear war that is unwinnable?” It is evidently based on hate and anger by people and their leaders who live behind borders that may vary from one country to another. There seems to be no humanity, tolerance, empathy, or consideration of those who are of a different racial, color, ethnicity, spirituality or religion, financial, nor even a polite acceptance or the slightest of our differences. It boils down to intolerance and hatred. Why the hell is that?
Think of the wonderful life we could all lead if we had no need for anything military, which, if you understand nuclear weapons, makes a huge national military of old irrelevant and useless, especially for territorial ground troops, often commonly referred to as ‘foot-soldiers’. We are capable of killing off each other world-wide in a matter of not hours, but minutes, with today’s “triads” that we and other nuclear nations have developed to one degree or another, yet the nation that pushes the nuclear button 1st will also die in the same short time-frame as the nation(s) they are attacking. ~llaw
A Nuclear War is Unwinnable, So Why Do We Keep Preparing for One?
Posted: August 6th, 2024
By Walter Pincus
Pulitzer Prize Winning Journalist Walter Pincus is a contributing senior national security columnist for The Cipher Brief. He spent forty years at The Washington Post, writing on topics that ranged from nuclear weapons to politics. He is the author of Blown to Hell: America's Deadly Betrayal of the Marshall Islanders. Pincus won an Emmy in 1981 and was the recipient of the Arthur Ross Award from the American Academy for Diplomacy in 2010. He was also a team member for a Pulitzer Prize in 2002 and the George Polk Award in 1978.
OPINION — “We must prepare for a world where constraints on nuclear weapons arsenals disappear entirely, modernizing U.S. nuclear capabilities today and preparing for future posture adjustments may help incentivize our adversaries to engage in strategic arms control discussions. However, if our adversaries continue to make choices that make them and the world less safe, the United States is prepared to do what is necessary to successfully compete, to deter aggression, and assure our allies in this new nuclear age.”
That was Dr. Vipin Narang, the Acting Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space Policy, speaking last Wednesday, at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, whose Project on Nuclear Issues hosted an event for early- and mid-career nuclear experts.
At the Pentagon, Dr. Narang’s portfolio includes nuclear deterrence, and he chairs an international advisory panel to NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group. He also helped form the new Nuclear Consultative Group with South Korea. Dr. Narang is on public service leave from MIT where he served as the Frank Stanton Professor of Nuclear Security and Political Science. He is author of Nuclear Strategy in the Modern Age, and Seeking the Bomb: Strategies of Nuclear Proliferation.
Dr. Narang talked about current trends and how they are affecting future planning in more specific terms than have other Biden administration officials. On Capitol Hill and among U.S. allies in Europe and the Indo-Pacific area, there is concern about the U.S. facing two peer nuclear powers with Chinese nuclear weapon expansion and Moscow’s developing new nuclear weaponry.
“Absent a change in the nuclear trajectories of the PRC (People’s Republic of China), Russia, and North Korea, we may reach a point where a change in the size or posture of our current deployed forces is necessary,” Dr. Narang said, adding, “There is no need to grow the stockpile yet, but adjustments to the number of deployed capabilities may be necessary if our adversaries continue down their current paths.”
He also reassured his audience that, “We are confident in our current forces and posture today,” and that “we will also abide by the central limits of New START for the duration of the treaty as long as we assess that Russia continues to do so. But in an uncertain world, preserving the option to change course tomorrow requires that we make necessary decisions and investments today.”
It’s not as if the U.S. is standing still. Dr. Narang pointed out that pushed by Congress, the Biden administration is developing a new nuclear sub-launched cruise missile (SLCM-N) for which the Senate Appropriations Committee last week, approved $70 million in the fiscal 2025 budget.
Already in the works, is a new tactical nuclear bomb, the B61-13, designed to attack harder- protected, deeply-based or large-area targets, and is intended to replace the B61-7, which has a yield of up to 360 kilotons – the equivalent of 360 thousand tons of TNT.
I want to pause and try to explain, which is almost never done by U.S. officials when discussing nuclear weapons, what such nuclear weapons could do if they are used in warfare.
There was recently an outcry over U.S. 2,000-pound conventional bombs being delivered to Israel for its war in Gaza based on the damage such a weapon could have on the civilian population. Such a bomb contains roughly 945 pounds of explosives.
A single, one kiloton nuclear weapon contains the equivalent power of 1,000 tons of explosives and thus alone has the explosive power of 2,000 of those U.S. 2,000-pound conventional bombs – the ones the U.S. halted giving the Israelis because of the damage they would cause. And that does not include the enormous heat and long-lasting radiation such nuclear weapons also deliver.
Now think of the extensive and long-lasting, widespread damage that would result from use of one B61-13, should its full 360 kilotons ever be unleashed.
Dr. Narang also said, “The growth in the number of Chinese strategic targets alone I think, leads one to the conclusion that a modernization program sized for a completely different security environment may need to be reassessed in sort of the multiple, nuclear challenger world.”
He is referring to the idea that each silo for a new Chinese nuclear ICBM, each mobile ICBM, each strategic submarine, or nuclear-capable, strategic bomber is a target for a nuclear weapon.
That is how the need for additional nuclear weapons gets driven up, because deterrence strategy since the Cold War, has been a numbers game. To deter a nuclear-armed enemy, you had to have enough nuclear weapons to absorb a first strike, and survive with enough of your own weapons to destroy the enemy’s remaining weapons.
Of course, that is why the U.S. and the Russians have so-called triads of delivery systems – land-based ICBMs, strategic bombers and a major portion of their strategic warheads on difficult-to-find submarines, as have the British, French and Israelis. It is also why the Chinese are creating their own triad with a strategic submarine force – as are the North Koreans.
This idea of nuclear weapons only being used to attack a potential enemy’s nuclear weapons arose because neither the U.S., nor apparently the Soviet Union, wanted to appear to be using nuclear weapons to attack enemy cities because that would result in millions of civilian deaths and appear to violate traditional rules of war.
The Cipher Brief Threat Conference is happening October 5-8 in Sea Island, GA. The world’s leading minds on national security from both the public and private sectors will be there. Will you? Apply for a seat at the table today.
In fact, that is exactly why atomic bombs were originally created and used — as terror weapons to kill and wound civilians and thus end the war with Japan. Hiroshima and Nagasaki had some military facilities, but they were also selected as targets because other Japanese cities had already been partially destroyed and thus, the impact of these new atomic bombs would be less dramatic.
Today’s hydrogen bombs are much more powerful than the two atomic bombs used on Japan, so why the U.S. and Russia, which already have thousands of them, would want more is among many questions about the nuclear arms race that is worth asking.
Meanwhile, Dr. Narang last week, voiced concern about “covering” nuclear weapons targets.
“As the security environment continues to deteriorate, and you have the multiple challenger problem, you don’t want to have to rely on triad or strategic forces to deter in the Indo-Pacific,” he said, “especially with the growth in Chinese forces — which would leave strategic targets uncovered.”
The answer to covering China’s non-strategic nuclear weapons, according to Dr. Narang, is “essentially a SLCM-N. It has to be – in the maritime [Indo-Pacific] environment, you can’t have forward land presence [U.S. tactical nuclear-capable fighter-bombers] in the way that we have in Europe.”
In Europe, Dr. Narang pointed out, “We’re completing the modernization of NATO nuclear capabilities through the transition to the fifth-generation F-35 [nuclear-capable, fighter-bombers] and the B61-12 [new nuclear bomb with more accuracy and limited stand-off guidance capability], which are bolstering the military effectiveness and the credibility of the deterrent.”
Dr, Narang described the SLCM-N and B61-12 as “regional capabilities, you know, primarily for regional contingencies.”
What is also underway, is examination and groundwork for, as Dr. Narang put it, “the expiration of New START, if there’s no follow-on treaty and our adversaries continue down this pathway, are we prepared – if necessary, and if the President decides to do so, do we – are we able to potentially, if required, increase the number of deployed strategic capabilities as well?”
Dr. Narang added that, “We don’t need to outpace our adversaries or even the combined number of the adversaries. We do seek a smart, flexible posture that deters, you know, at a strategic level, and assures our allies and partners.”
He went on, “It’s not an unrestrained posture. But I think we are now in the middle of thinking about what a smart posture looks like in a multiple nuclear challenger world where your adversaries have revisionist objectives, they’re modernizing and expanding their arsenals, and you may face them in a collaborative or collusive manner, and you know, what sort of stress that puts on the force.”
On a somewhat positive side, Dr. Narang said at one point, “I think Russia will return to arms control talks akin to whatever following New START will be, when it realizes that an unrestrained, you know, sort of nuclear competition is not in its interest. And I firmly believe it’s not in their interest.”
I hope he is right, not just from the Russian side, but from the U.S. and Chinese sides as well.
My view, as I have often written, is that nuclear weapons have become more diplomatic and/or domestic political weapons, and less weapons to fight actual wars.
The reality is, as leaders of the U.S., Russia, China, France and the United Kingdom said in a joint statement just over two years ago, “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought.” And they also said that such weapons “for as long as they continue to exist should serve defensive purposes, deter aggression, and prevent war.”
The first statement remains true, the latter has not yet worked out totally as stated.
ABOUT THE FOLLOWING ACCESS TO “LLAW’S ALL THINGS NUCLEAR” RELATED MEDIA:
There are 7 categories, with the latest (#7) being a Friday weekly roundup of IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) global nuclear news stories. Also included is a bonus non-nuclear category for news about the Yellowstone caldera and other volcanic and caldera activity around the world that play an important role in humanity’s lives. The feature categories provide articles and information about ‘all things nuclear’ for you to pick from, usually with up to 3 links with headlines concerning the most important media stories in each category, but sometimes fewer and occasionally even none (especially so with the Yellowstone Caldera). The Categories are listed below in their usual order:
All Things Nuclear
Nuclear Power
Nuclear Power Emergencies
Nuclear War
Nuclear War Threats
Yellowstone Caldera (Note: There are 2 Yellowstone Caldera bonus stories (may be duplicates from different publications) available in this evening’s Post.)
IAEA Weekly News (Friday’s only)
Whenever there is an underlined link to a Category media news story, if you press or click on the link provided, you no longer have to cut and paste to your web browser, since this Post’s link will take you directly to the article in your browser.
A current Digest of major nuclear media headlines with automated links is listed below by nuclear Category (in the above listed order). If a Category heading does not appear in the daily news Digest, it means there was no news reported from this Category today. Generally, the three best articles in each Category from around the nuclear world(s) are Posted. Occasionally, if a Post is important enough, it may be listed in multiple Categories.
TODAY’S NUCLEAR WORLD’S NEWS, Tuesday, (08/06/2024)
All Things Nuclear
NEWS
Majority of Americans support more nuclear power in the country - Pew Research Center
Pew Research Center
... all U.S. electricity in 2023, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. About half of the United States' nuclear power reactors (48) ...
Opinion | What Today's Nuclear Arms Race Looks Like to Hiroshima Survivors
The New York Times
As the Cold War closed, many people on the United States stopped thinking about nuclear weapons. ... All right. Let me introduce myself. Is it OK ...
Cranes, but make it fashion - The Nuclear Threat Initiative
The Nuclear Threat Initiative
Originally, we made this dress for my summer 2022 collection, and that season was all about the crane. We had a hallway of 4,000 cranes strung ...
Nuclear Power
NEWS
Advanced nuclear energy working toward a future presence in the Permian Basin - YouTube
YouTube
A recent partnership aims to bring liquid fueled molten salt reactors to the region and Texas. The reactors will help water and energy needs as ...
CEI's The Surge: Loper Bright, nuclear exports, and more - Competitive Enterprise Institute
Competitive Enterprise Institute
If you are interested in analysis and perspective on current energy and environmental issues, then we encourage you to subscribe to this new ...
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant turns 50 with plans to continue operations
Alabama Daily News
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant in Athens, Ala., the Tennessee Valley Authority's largest electricity generating asset, is celebrating 50 years of ...
Nuclear War
NEWS
A Nuclear War is Unwinnable, So Why Do We Keep Preparing for One? - The Cipher Brief
The Cipher Brief
Cipher Brief Senior National Security Columnist Walter Pincus writes that nuclear wars are unwinnable and asks why we keep preparing for one.
We Need a New Peace Movement to Prevent Nuclear War - Jacobin
Jacobin
Citizen movements against nuclear weapons during the Cold War helped significantly reduce nuclear risks. As global nuclear tension spikes again, we ...
Israeli policy means 'difficult to know' how close world is to nuclear war, warns anti ... - Euractiv
Euractiv
... nuclear war, a leading anti-nuclear weapons group has warned. The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN)—a Geneva-based Nobel ...
Nuclear War Threats
NEWS
We Need a New Peace Movement to Prevent Nuclear War - Jacobin
Jacobin
Citizen movements against nuclear weapons during the Cold War helped significantly reduce nuclear risks. ... People who pay attention to nuclear threats ...
Terrifying maps identifies areas of US most likely to be targeted in nuclear war - MSN
MSN
The threat of nuclear war looms over parts of America as Russia's ... Other cities that may face threats include Dallas-Fort Worth, Miami, and ...
Why China Is Doubling Down on Nuclear Weapons—Experts Weigh in - Newsweek
Newsweek
... nuclear triad," alongside nuclear threats posed by Russia and North Korea. ... nuclear war and on controlling escalation in a nuclear war
Yellowstone Caldera
NEWS
What will happen if Yellowstone's supervolcano erupts after 600k-year slumber - Daily Mail
Daily Mail
The Yellowstone caldera, Spanish for 'cooking pot,' is defined as a 'supervolcano' due to its historic capacity for eruptions that can spew more ...
What will happen if Yellowstone's supervolcano erupts? - MSN
MSN
Although the Yellowstone caldera's initial blast would kill thousands in a 'super-eruption,' showering multiple US states in 'pyroclastic flows' of ...