New US nuclear usage doctrine: pre-emption, counter WMD, and for demonstration purposes (unfinished)

summary:

A new doctrine for usage of nuclear weapons appeared on the Web in 2005 - the draft of the Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations was exposed in an  article in Arms Control Today in September 2005 and the Washington Post.

The document  “makes it clear that the United States will not necessarily wait for the attack but pre-empt with nuclear weapons if necessary. It identifies four conditions where pre-emptive use might occur:

• An adversary intending to use weapons of mass destruction against U.S., multinational, or allies forces or civilian populations.

• Imminent attack from an adversary’s biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy.

• Attacks on adversary installations including weapons of mass destruction; deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons; or the command and control infrastructure required for the adversary to execute a WMD attack against the United States or its friends and allies.

• Demonstration of U.S. intent and capability to use nuclear weapons to deter adversary WMD use.

Interestingly, the Washington Post coverage of the same document did not mention this last justification.  The draft paper was removed from the web and formally cancelled by the Pentagon  but is thought to be still the policy
Full article at:

http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2005_09/Kristensen.asp

larger extract below:

September 2005
The Role of US Nuclear Weapons: New Doctrine Falls Short of Bush Pledge 

Hans M. Kristensen

A nuclear draft doctrine written by the Pentagon calls for maintaining an aggressive nuclear posture with weapons on high alert to strike adversaries armed with weapons of mass destruction (WMD), pre-emptively if necessary.

The doctrine, the first formal update since the Bush administration took office, is entitled “Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations” and has been strongly influenced by the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and other directives published by the Bush administration since 2001. A final version is expected later this fall.

The draft doctrine and editing comments were freely available on the Internet until recently, providing a rare glimpse into the secret world of nuclear planning in the post-Cold War era.

Foremost among the doctrine’s new features are the incorporation of pre-emption into U.S. nuclear doctrine and the integration of conventional weapons and missile defenses into strategic planning. The Bush administration claims that it is significantly reducing the role of nuclear weapons.

…
For example, the new nuclear doctrine states that an adversary might detonate a nuclear weapon high in the atmosphere to damage U.S. military electronic equipment with a high-altitude electromagnetic pulse. Whatever the adversary use might be, the new nuclear doctrine makes it clear that the United States will not necessarily wait for the attack but pre-empt with nuclear weapons if necessary. It identifies four conditions where pre-emptive use might occur:

• An adversary intending to use weapons of mass destruction against U.S., multinational, or allies forces or civilian populations.

• Imminent attack from an adversary’s biological weapons that only effects from nuclear weapons can safely destroy.

• Attacks on adversary installations including weapons of mass destruction; deep, hardened bunkers containing chemical or biological weapons; or the command and control infrastructure required for the adversary to execute a WMD attack against the United States or its friends and allies.

• Demonstration of U.S. intent and capability to use nuclear weapons to deter adversary WMD use.

One Response to “New US nuclear usage doctrine: pre-emption, counter WMD, and for demonstration purposes (unfinished)”

    1. [...] US nuclear weapons policy has also recently been redefined - among other things, to allow the President to use nuclear weapons to prevent proliferation, and also to allow the use of nuclear weapons simply to demonstrate that the US is prepared to use nuclear weapons. The US debate urge to make nukes ‘usable’ is undeniably there. In which light, a small nuclear bunker buster attack on a remote nuclear facility, or perhaps to ‘prevent’ an Iranian counterattack on US forces in Iraq with chemical weapons could justify opening the age of ‘usable nukes’. [...]

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.