Report: World May Face New Nuclear Arms Race

An ICBM loaded into a solo at the Titan Missile Museum in Tucson, Arizona.<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Tucson05_TitanICBM.jpg">Wikimedia</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


Fear of new American military capabilities is spurring nuclear powers like Russia and China to modernize their atomic arsenals and evade disarmament, according to a new report from a US-British think tank.

Even though Barack Obama has pledged to work for global disarmament and the United States negotiated a new nuclear arms treaty with Russia, the world’s nine global states still possess 22,400 warheads and are moving swiftly to “modernize” their stockpiles, according to the study “Beyond the United Kingdom: Trends in Other Nuclear States” (PDF), by researchers at the British-American Security Information Council. “There is little sign in any of these nuclear armed states that a future without nuclear weapons is seriously being contemplated,” the authors conclude.

The report is part of a major push in Great Britain to reassess that country’s nuclear weapons program, but it’s chock full of data and analyses that show how the Nuclear Nine are expanding their capabilities, exploiting treaty loopholes, and heading for a possible 21st-century arms race.

Much of that effort is being spurred by US policy, the report notes: “[A]lthough the Obama administration deserves huge credit for kick-starting multilateral nuclear disarmament talks with Russia, it also appears true that the United States continues to view nuclear weapons as essential to national security and is planning, and spending, to ensure it has robust nuclear forces for many decades to come.”

Even those disarmament talks with Russia have yielded some hawkish conclusions among US defense planners. Last year, when Obama negotiated the New START treaty with his Russian counterpart, Dmitri Medvedev, both sides agreed to reduce their number of deployed, attack-ready nukes to 1,550. But there’s a massive loophole for jet bombers like the B-52 and stealthy B-2: Each jet only counts as having one deployed nuclear missile, no matter how many missiles and warheads it can stuff into its bomb bays and under its wings. As a result, the report states, “A force of 60 bombers loaded at their maximum capacity of 1,136 bombs and cruise missiles would only count as 60 weapons under New START.”

The United States is also developing new “dangerous and destabilising” military capabilities that have put Russia and China on guard. The Obama White House is continuing to explore “Star Wars”-style ballistic missile defense, as well as a Donald Rumsfeld-devised scheme called “Conventional Prompt Global Strike” that would put non-nuclear payloads on revamped intercontinental ballistic missiles, capable of hitting targets around the world at a moment’s notice. That latter program apparently has other nuclear nations’ leaders skittish:

The fear is that these weapons would give the U.S., in the midst of a serious crisis, a conventional first strike capability against Russian nuclear forces, and that the U.S. ballistic missile defence system would be able to deter or defend effectively against any Russian response. There is also a concern that Russia might not be able to distinguish between a conventional or nuclear ballistic missile launch against it, and might consequently mistake a conventional attack for a nuclear one and react accordingly, perhaps launching nuclear armed missiles of its own in response to a warning of an incoming missile attack.

As a result, Russia is justifying its nuclear modernization as a check to US powers. And it isn’t alone:

The Chinese programme is justified by reference to these same developments in the United States and by reference to India’s programme. India’s programme, in turn, is driven partly by fear over Pakistan and China while Pakistan’s nuclear programme is justified by reference to Indian conventional force superiority. French nuclear weapons modernisation has been justified as a response to stockpiles elsewhere that “keep on growing.”

With the US embroiled in a major budget debate and defense dollars facing unprecedented scrutiny, the BASIC report could add weight to claims that America’s nuclear weapons program is too big for its own good.

Other fascinating facts from the report:

  • “It is estimated that more than 128,000 nuclear warheads have been built since 1945, all but two percent of them by the United States and the Soviet Union/Russia.”
  • The global number of nuclear weapons “in state inventories peaked at almost 70,000 in 1986.”
  • In summer 2010, the world’s nine nuclear states possessed an estimated 22,400 intact warheads. Ninety-five percent belonged to the US and Russia.
  • Much of the numbers are based on guesswork, since “China, India, Pakistan, Israel, and North Korea release no official data on their nuclear stockpiles at all.”

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate