By Paul Sonne, The Washington Post

The Pentagon released a new nuclear arms policy Friday that calls for the introduction of two new types of weapons, effectively ending Obama-era efforts to reduce the size and scope of the U.S. arsenal and minimize the role of nuclear weapons in defense planning.

Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said in an introductory note to the new policy – the first update since 2010 – that the changes reflect a need to “look reality in the eye” and “see the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.”

The Obama administration’s policy hinged on what the former president called a moral obligation for the United States to lead by example in ridding the world of nuclear weapons. But officials in the Trump administration and the U.S. military argue that the former president’s approach proved overly idealistic, particularly as Russia re-emerged as a foe, and failed to convince U.S. nuclear adversaries to follow suit.

“Over the course of the last several years, Russia and China have been building new types and kinds of nuclear weapons, both delivery systems and actual warheads,” Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told journalists earlier this week. “We have not, which means the capability of Russian and Chinese nuclear arsenals is actually getting better against ours.”

The new nuclear weapons policy follows on President Donald Trump’s promise before taking office to expand and strengthen U.S. nuclear capabilities. Trump also vowed during his State of the Union address Tuesday to build a nuclear arsenal “so strong and powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression.”

The threats have changed dramatically since the last time the Pentagon updated its nuclear weapons policy, with Russia re-emerging as a geopolitical foe and both Moscow and Beijing investing in their nuclear arsenals. North Korea, meanwhile, has edged closer to possessing a missile capable of striking the U.S. mainland with a nuclear warhead, bringing the prospect of nuclear war back to the forefront of the American psyche for the first time since the Cold War.

Trump’s perceived volatility has raised more concerns among Americans about the president’s exclusive authority to order a nuclear attack.

The policy unveiled Friday envisions the introduction of so-called “low-yield nukes” on submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Russia possesses a large arsenal of small nuclear weapons that the United States mostly lacks. The Pentagon worries that Moscow could seize part or all of a U.S. ally state and then detonate a small nuclear weapon to prevent American troops from coming to the rescue. Washington would be forced to choose between launching a much larger scale nuclear attack on Russia or responding with less serious conventional arms that would make Washington look weak. The Pentagon says it wants a proportionate weapon to match.

The new Pentagon policy also outlines longer-term plans to reintroduce a nuclear submarine-launched cruise missile called an SLCM (“slick-em”), which the administration of President George H.W. Bush stopped deploying and the Obama administration ordered removed from the stockpile. Officials say the SLCM would provide reassurance to Japan and South Korea in the face of threats from North Korea and put pressure on Russia to stop violating the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty.

A draft of the new policy, which was leaked in mid January, prompted an outcry from disarmament advocates, who assailed the Trump administration for pursuing what they described as unnecessary new nuclear weapons that could start an arms race.

Critics also accused the Department of Defense of lowering the threshold for what might provoke a U.S. nuclear strike by mentioning cyber attacks in the list of non-nuclear strategic threats.

The new policy “calls for more usable nuclear weapons with low yields, and for their first use in response to cyber and conventional strikes on civilian infrastructure such as financial, transportation, energy and communications networks,” said Bruce Blair, co-founder of the antinuclear weapons advocacy group Global Zero. “It makes nuclear war more likely, not less.”

The Pentagon denies those accusations, pointing out that the new policy continues to stipulate that the United States would only ever use nuclear weapons in “extreme circumstances.”

Rob Soofer, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Nuclear and Missile Defense Policy, said the introduction of new capabilities should in fact raise the threshold by making Russia less likely to think it can get away with a limited nuclear attack against the United States or its allies.

Selva, the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the review was consistent with U.S. policy dating back decades. He said the idea that the United States would revert to a nuclear attack in response to a simple cyber attack was inaccurate.

“We reserve the right to use nuclear weapons when our national interests, our population or infrasturucre are attacked with significant consequence,” Selva said, suggesting that any such attack that results in a high number of deaths could provoke a U.S. nuclear response.</s>Buried In Trump's Nuclear Report: A Russian Doomsday Weapon

Enlarge this image toggle caption USAF Lookout Moutain Laboratory USAF Lookout Moutain Laboratory

The Trump administration released a report on the state of America's nuclear weaponry on Friday. The assessment, known as a Nuclear Posture Review, mainly concerns U.S. nukes and missiles.

But buried in the plan is a mention of a mysterious Russian weapon called "Status-6." On paper, at least, Status-6 appears to be a kind of doomsday device. The report refers to it as "a new intercontinental, nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered, undersea autonomous torpedo."

"The radius of total or near-total destruction is the size of a pretty large metropolitan area, actually," says Edward Geist, a Russia specialist at the Rand Corp. who has spent time looking at the weapon. "It's difficult to imagine in normal terms."

Status-6 made its first public appearance in 2015, while Russian President Vladimir Putin was visiting with his generals in the city of Sochi.

Russia state television reported on the visit. The camera shows Putin seated at a long table. Then it cuts to a shot over one of the general's shoulders. He is looking at what appears to be a drawing of a new nuclear weapon called the Oceanic Multipurpose System Status-6.

Status-6 looks like a giant torpedo about a third the length of a big Russian submarine. According to the slide, it is nuclear-powered, meaning it can roam for months and possibly even years beneath the ocean without surfacing. Its payload is a nuclear warhead "many tens of megatons in yield," Geist says.

That is thousands of times more powerful than the bombs dropped at the end of World War II and more powerful than anything currently in the U.S. and Russian arsenals.

Status-6 would launch from beneath a Russian submarine. It would shoot at a depth too deep to be intercepted and travel for thousands of miles. Upon reaching its target along the U.S. coastline, it would detonate, swallowing up whatever city happened to be nearby.

"The only possible U.S. targets are large port cities," says Mark Schneider, a senior analyst with the National Institute for Public Policy, wrote in an e-mail. "The detonation of Status-6 in any of them would essentially wipe out their population into the far suburbs."

"The detonation would cause a very large amount of radioactive fallout," adds Pavel Podvig, an arms control expert who runs a blog called Russian Strategic Nuclear Forces. Podvig believes the weapon could potentially bathe the entire Northeast Corridor in radioactive soot.

Status-6 would probably be used as a "third-strike" weapon of last resort. If Russia fell under attack from the U.S. and couldn't retaliate with its missiles, it might trigger Status-6: a doomsday machine. Or at least a doomsday-ish machine.

YouTube

Then again, the whole thing might be a fake.

"The drawing of this drone looks more like an enlarged drawing of a smaller torpedo," says Podvig. In other words, it looks as if the Russians may have just taken some torpedo clip art, blown it up to terrifying size and then broadcast it on state television.

Why?

"It's a way to get our attention," says Geist.

Geist says that the "leak" of Status-6 was deliberate. Russia worries that U.S. missile defenses might be able to shoot down its missiles in a nuclear war. By showing a plan for Status-6, Russia is warning the U.S. that if it continues to build such defensive systems, then Russia will find another way to strike, with a missile that can't be intercepted.

"My read of the whole Status-6 slide leak is that the Russians were trying to send us a message," Geist says.

Podvig agrees that the leak of Status-6 is probably just a warning shot. But the fact that it appeared in the Pentagon's newest report on nuclear weapons shows that some war planners are taking the idea seriously.

There may be some politics involved in that decision as well, says Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists. The Trump administration is pushing hard for upgrades to America's nuclear arsenal. In his State of the Union address, the president called for making the arsenal "so strong and so powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression by any other nation or anyone else."

Citing Status-6 helps to build the case that upgrades to American nukes are needed, Kristensen says.

For all the rhetoric around Status-6, Podvig and Geist both believe that the program isn't completely made-up. Geist says a long-range underwater drone without a nuclear warhead would be a useful weapon.

"You could use it for tapping our underwater communications cables," he says. "Or simpler, in a war, is just going out and like finding them and cutting them."

Status-6 could also carry conventional munitions, like cruise missiles, and launch them after hiding for months beneath the water.

Podvig has seen photos that he says indicate the Russians are working on some hardware for big underwater drones.

"My best guess is that there is there is a project to design an underwater vehicle with a purpose, unknown at this point," he says. "There is something there."</s>The Trump administration on Friday called for the development of two new types of nuclear weapons to better deter potential adversaries, in a reassessment of the current arsenal that critics slammed as increasing the likelihood of nuclear conflict.

The Pentagon's Nuclear Posture Review, the first since 2010, calls for a "lower-yield" option — with less powerful explosive capacity — for ballistic and cruise missiles launched from submarines.

It also says that nuclear weapons could be used to respond to “extreme circumstances,” including non-nuclear attacks.

The new steps are needed to respond to aggressive efforts by Russia and China to update their arsenals, as well as nuclear provocations from North Korea and the ambiguity surrounding Iran’s ambitions, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis wrote in the unclassified summary of the secret review.

“We must look reality in the eye and see the world as it is, not as we wish it to be,” Mattis says, stressing that “in no way does this approach lower the nuclear threshold.”

The lower-yield weapons would enhance the credibility of the U.S. arsenal, the review asserts.

"Expanding flexible U.S. nuclear options now, to include low-yield options, is important for the preservation of credible deterrence against regional aggression," the 10-page summary states.

They could also be used to deter large-scale non-nuclear attacks.

"These supplements to the planned nuclear force replacement program are prudent options for enhancing the flexibility and diversity of U.S. nuclear capabilities," the review says. "They are compliant with all treaties and agreements, and together, they will: provide a diverse set of characteristics enhancing our ability to tailor deterrence and assurance; expand the range of credible U.S. options for responding to nuclear or non-nuclear strategic attack; and, enhance deterrence by signaling to potential adversaries that their limited nuclear escalation offers no exploitable advantage."

But arms control advocates caution that broadening the set of circumstances when the U.S. might use nuclear weapons runs the risk of increasing the likelihood of a nuclear conflict.

“This is a very dangerous sort of slide where we start to soften up the norm with [respect] to nuclear weapons,” said Beatrice Fihn, director of the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons. “It makes the likelihood of use accidentally or on purpose much more likely.”

Deputy Defense Secretary Pat Shanahan on Friday disputed that argument, which has been widely expressed since a draft of the document leaked last month.

At the Pentagon on Friday he argued that the review is a continuation of what U.S. nuclear policy has been since the Cold War.

“Some will say that any additional capability, no matter how measured, increases the chances of using on of these weapons,” Shanahan told reporters. “On the contrary, it is the exact opposite.”

Developing lower-yield nuclear weapons allows the U.S. to avoid the “limits” of a “one-size-fits-all” policy and does not grow the nuclear stockpile or break any treaty obligations, Shanahan said. And clarifying “longstanding policy” that nuclear weapons could be used to respond to a severe non-nuclear attack is “stabilizing.”

“It lowers the risk of nuclear use by anyone,” he said. “The United States does not want to use nuclear weapons.”

John Rood, the undersecretary of Defense for policy, said the military is looking to spend "a modest amount" on the lower-yield ballistic missile "in the near term" — beginning in the administration's fiscal 2019 budget request later this month.

The Department of Energy builds the nation's nuclear warheads.

Reviving the submarine-launched cruise missile, meanwhile, appears to be a longer-term plan. Rood said a study needs to be completed on the cost and timeline.

Supporters say the plan fills a gap in nuclear capability that leaves the U.S. vulnerable.

Michaela Dodge, a senior policy analyst at the Heritage Foundation, said Russia believes the U.S. will not use one of its high-yield nuclear weapons to respond to a low-yield attack, so having a lower-yield option increases deterrence.

“In their minds, they are more likely to think they can get away with using low-yield nuclear weapons in certain scenarios, like when they’re losing with conventional weapons,” Dodge said.

But opponents argue that the strategy marks a dramatic departure from previous policy set by the Obama administration’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review.

In addition to the two new proposed weapons — including replacing the nuclear-armed Tomahawk cruise missiles that were retired in 2013 — the assertion that that nuclear weapons could be used to respond to “extreme circumstances" short of a nuclear attack was particularly concerning.

“The 2010 review sought to narrow the roles and missions for nuclear weapons in U.S. strategy. This one very explicitly seeks to broaden the roles and the missions,” said Daryl Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association. “It very explicitly says that nuclear weapons have a role beyond deterring nuclear use, that they have a role in countering non-nuclear strategic threats too.”

Being willing to use nuclear weapons to respond to something like a massive cyberattack also increases the risk of a significant “blunder,” Ernest Moniz, a former Energy secretary under Obama, and former Sen. Sam Nunn, a co-chair of the Nuclear Threat Initiative, wrote in an op-ed Thursday.

“If a cyberattack took out a major part of our electrical grid, would we be able to quickly and confidently identify the attacking country?” the men wrote.

Critics also allege that the plan to bring new weapons into the U.S. nuclear arsenal will launch a global nuclear arms race, prompting countries like Russia and China to rush to further expand their nuclear power in response.

“It will reinforce the existing trends in their programs to expand their capabilities to counter what they fear to be a widening array of U.S. nuclear threats,” Kimball said. “Just because Russia may have low-yield nuclear warhead options doesn’t mean we need to make the same dumb mistake.”

The Trump administration review also continues the Obama administration’s $1.2 trillion plan to modernize each leg of the nuclear triad: nuclear-armed bombers, submarines and land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles.

It is an investment that some in Congress say is already too high, even without any new classes of weapons.

"This Nuclear Posture Review takes the United States in a dangerous direction that will undermine our defense posture, and further aggravate our national security budgeting difficulties," Rep. Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, said in a statement Friday. “The U.S. Congress is currently unable to fund the existing, unrealistic $1.2 trillion plan to upgrade our nuclear weapons enterprise. By requesting even more new nuclear weapon systems and additional unneeded capacity, President [Donald] Trump is making the problem worse."

But key Republicans who applauded the plan said it is essential that Congress find the money.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, promised in a statement to work to provide "sustained funding" — a sentiment echoed by Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas), his counterpart in the House.

"The programs that support our deterrent, from nuclear plants and labs, new ballistic missile submarines, a modern bomber program, and our ICBMs, are already broadly supported in Congress and by the American people," Thornberry said in a statement. "Like other national security programs, they depend on adequate and reliable funding from Congress."</s>The Pentagon released a new nuclear arms policy Friday that calls for the introduction of two new types of weapons, effectively ending Obama-era efforts to reduce the size and scope of the U.S. arsenal and minimize the role of nuclear weapons.

Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis said in an introductory note to the new policy — the first update since 2010 — that the changes reflect a need to “look reality in the eye” and “see the world as it is, not as we wish it to be.”

The Obama administration’s policy hinged on what the former president called a moral obligation for the United States to lead by example in ridding the world of nuclear weapons. But officials in the Trump administration and the U.S. military argue that the former president’s approach was too idealistic, particularly as Russia re-emerged as a foe, and failed to convince U.S. adversaries to follow suit.

“Over the course of the last several years, Russia and China have been building new types and kinds of nuclear weapons, both delivery systems and actual warheads,” Air Force Gen. Paul Selva, vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said this week. “We have not, which means the capability of Russian and Chinese nuclear arsenals is actually getting better against ours.”

The new nuclear weapons policy follows on President Donald Trump’s promise before taking office to expand and strengthen U.S. nuclear capabilities. Trump also vowed during his State of the Union address Tuesday to build a nuclear arsenal “so strong and powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression.”

The threats have changed dramatically since the last time the Pentagon updated its nuclear weapons policy, with Russia re-emerging as a geopolitical foe and both Moscow and Beijing investing in their nuclear arsenals. North Korea, meanwhile, has edged closer to possessing a missile capable of striking the U.S. mainland with a nuclear warhead, bringing the prospect of nuclear war back to the forefront of the American psyche for the first time since the Cold War.

The new policy envisions the introduction of “low-yield nukes” on submarine-launched ballistic missiles.

Russia possesses a large arsenal of small nuclear weapons that the United States mostly lacks. The Pentagon worries that Moscow could seize part or all of a U.S. ally state and then detonate a small nuclear weapon to prevent American troops from coming to the rescue.

The new Pentagon policy also outlines longer-term plans to reintroduce a nuclear submarine-launched cruise missile called an SLCM, which the Obama administration ordered removed from the United States’ stockpile.</s>The US military wants to revamp its nuclear arsenal and develop new low-yield atomic weapons, largely in response to Russian actions in recent years, the Pentagon said in a policy statement released Friday.

The so-called Nuclear Posture Review outlines the Pentagon's nuclear ambitions under President Donald Trump and is the first time since 2010 that the military has spelled out how it foresees nuclear threats in the coming decades.

"The strategy develops capabilities aimed at making use of nuclear weapons less likely," Trump said in a statement. "It enhances deterrence of strategic attacks against our Nation, and our allies and partners, that may not come in the form of nuclear weapons."

"And, importantly, it reaffirms our commitment to arms control and nuclear non-proliferation, maintains the moratorium on nuclear testing, and commits to improving efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to nuclear terrorism," he said.

The document marks a sobering break from the vision for America's atomic future under Barack Obama, who during a famous speech in Prague in 2009 called for the elimination of nuclear weapons.

While it underscores the administration's concerns about North Korea, Iran and China, the focus falls largely on Russia.

"This is a response to Russian expansion of their capability and the nature of their strategy and doctrine," Defense Secretary Jim Mattis wrote in the introduction to the 75-page document.

"These developments, coupled with Russia's seizure of Crimea and nuclear threats against our allies, mark Moscow's decided return to Great Power competition," he also wrote.

The Pentagon worries Russia assumes America's regular, large-yield weapons are essentially too big to ever be detonated, as their use would likely result in large-scale retaliation and wipe much of humanity off the map.

"There are strong indications that our current strategy posture and capabilities are perceived by the Russians as potentially inadequate to deter them," Greg Weaver, the deputy director of strategic capabilities for the military's Joint Staff, told reporters.

"The US and NATO require a wider range of credible low-yield nuclear options to do a very specific thing: to convince the Russian leadership that if they initiate limited nuclear use, in a war with the alliance, our response will deny them the objective they seek and impose costs that far outweigh those benefits they can achieve," he added.

- More reliance on subs and ships -

The document, an earlier version of which was leaked last month, says that by having additional smaller nukes, the Pentagon can counter adversaries' "misperceptions" that the United States would not respond to another country using its own low-yield bomb.

The new strategy calls for a continuation of the nuclear modernization program ordered by Obama that encompasses all pillars of the "triad" -- ground-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched weapons and bombs delivered by plane.

But unlike the Obama strategy, which stressed reducing the role of nuclear weapons, the new policy has a more assertive tone.

Low-yield nuclear weapons, also known as "tactical" nukes, are still extremely powerful and can pack as much destructive punch as the bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki at the end of World War II.

America already has a massive nuclear arsenal at its disposal, including 150 B-61 nukes stored across multiple European countries that can be configured for low-yield options.

The new weapons envisioned by the Pentagon would be launchable from submarines or ships, so would not need to be stockpiled in Europe.

They could also get around Russian air defenses more easily.

The bombs would not add to America's nuclear horde, and would instead repurpose existing warheads, but critics say the Pentagon would be going against the spirit of non-proliferation agreements.

"We are on the cusp of a new era of nuclear proliferation," warned Barry Blechman, co-founder of the Stimson Center, a nonpartisan anti-nuclear proliferation think tank in Washington.

"This is the great nuclear danger raised by the new" nuclear policy.

Weaver disputed media accounts that the nuclear posture review lowered the threshold for America to use nuclear weapons.

"The purpose of these capabilities is to make a US response to nuclear use more credible, not to make US first use more likely," he said.</s>It sounds like the stuff from a Cold War novel: A Russian intercontinental nuclear-armed torpedo that can travel thousands of miles and strike U.S. coastal cities with minimal warning.

But that weapon isn't just a work of fiction. It's actually being developed in Russia, according to a new Defense Department report that assesses the arms advancements being made in other countries.

Such weapons research is a wake-up call for the U.S. to strengthen its own arsenal, the Defense Department's Nuclear Posture Review said Friday. The report calls for the U.S. to develop two new additional nuclear weapons to keep other world powers at bay.

Called the "Status-6 Oceanic Multipurpose System," the Russian torpedo is reported to be able to deliver a thermonuclear cobalt bomb of up to 100 megatons. The weapon could trigger a tsunami wave of radioactive water that would blanket a coastal city. Politicians have called the torpedo a "doomsday" weapon.

It was just one weapon highlighted in Friday's report, which focused heavily on current and future capabilities of U.S. weapons, along with the advancements made in countries like Russian, China, North Korea and Iran.

Russia is developing at least two new intercontinental-range systems: A hypersonic glide vehicle, which are harder to detect after fired, and a nuclear-armed undersea torpedo. Both China and Russia are also developing new missile-defense systems, the report concludes.

North Korea has also increased its missile capabilities and its chances of reaching the U.S. mainland.

"While the United States has continued to reduce the number and salience of nuclear weapons, others, including Russia and China, have moved in the opposite direction," the report says. "They have added new types of nuclear capabilities to their arsenals, increased the salience of nuclear forces in their strategies and plans, and engaged in increasingly aggressive behavior, including in outer space and cyber space."

The report calls for the U.S. to add new low-yield weapons, which would allow for a limited nuclear strike. The U.S. has mostly gotten rid of these weapons and the Pentagon worries this could be viewed as an "exploitable gap" because the choice would be between a much-larger nuclear attack or a less-lethal attack with smaller weapons.

The thought is with the low-yield weapons, other countries with the weapons would not use them for fears of retaliation from the U.S.

Despite being called low-yield, the weapons are extremely deadly. A low-yield nuclear weapon was used in Hiroshima, Japan. Critics worry the new weapons would make the U.S. more likely to use nuclear force and, hence, feed a nuclear arms race.

"This country possesses an extremely robust, highly credible nuclear deterrent that is capable of responding to any attack and defending our allies with decisive force," said Rep. Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee, adding the advanced weapons will "lower the threshold for using nuclear weapons."

"It is important that we not let a button-measuring contest devolve into a button-pushing contest," he said.

The report also calls for a modern nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile, which President George H.W. Bush stopped using and President Obama officially retired as part of the longtime strategy to reduce the number of nuclear weapons and lessen the role of the weapons in the U.S. defense policy.

The report notes the weapon "for decades had contributed to the deterrence and the assurance of allies" and the U.S. will "immediately begin efforts to restore this capability."

The report follows promises made by President Trump to strengthen the nation's nuclear arsenal. On Tuesday during his State of the Union address, the President called for a nuclear stockpile “so strong and powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression.”

But, under the Obama administration, the Pentagon had already planned to modernize the nation’s nuclear weaponry, which consists of missiles fired from land and sea and bombs from warplanes.

In 2016, the Pentagon had planned to spend about $100 billion from 2017 to 2022 to “sustain and modernize nuclear forces.” About $34 billion was slated to replace aging submarine-based weapons, intercontinental missiles, cruise missiles, bombers and bombs.

A new budget for the Pentagon, including its nuclear forces, is expected to be released in February, which should include plans detailed in Friday's report.

Secretary of Defense James Mattis said the weapons play an import role in keeping the world at peace.

"This review rests on a bedrock truth: nuclear weapons have and will continue to play a critical role in deterring nuclear attack and in preventing large-scale conventional warfare," he said. "...This, in turn, furthers global security."</s>The Pentagon plans to develop two "low-yield" nuclear warheads to be launched from ballistic-missile submarines and warships, to send a message to Moscow -- which the Trump administration accuses of amassing a stockpile of tactical nuclear weapons.

The new plan is outlined in Defense Secretary Jim Mattis's Nuclear Posture Review, released Friday afternoon.

"Expanding U.S. tailored response options will raise the nuclear threshold and help ensure that potential adversaries perceive no possible advantage in limited nuclear escalation, making nuclear weapons employment less likely," the new review said.

The Pentagon says Russia’s buildup of similar "low-yield" nukes is the reason it must match the threat.

“The United States would only consider the use of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances,” said Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick M. Shanahan. “Extreme circumstances could include significant non-nuclear strategic attacks,” he added without offering specifics.

Russian and Chinese officials were briefed by State Department officials Friday morning about the nuclear posture review.

It's the first such review in seven years, but much has changed since 2010, when the U.S. unilaterally reduced portions of its nuclear arsenal.

“Over the past decade, while the United States led the world in these reductions every one of our potential nuclear adversaries has been pursuing the exact opposite strategy,” said Deputy Energy Secretary Dan Brouillette. “These powers are increasing the numbers and types of nuclear weapons in their arsenal.”

After Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimean Peninsula, it deployed nuclear-capable intermediate range missiles to Kaliningrad, a Russian enclave on the border with Poland, leaving NATO leaders feeling helpless.

"Russia's nuclear saber-rattling is unjustified, destabilizing and dangerous," said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in 2015. Any deployment of nuclear forces to Crimea would “fundamentally change the balance of security in Europe,” he added.

Russia is bound by a decades-long arms treaty, known as the INF, from deploying ground-launched intermediate-range missiles. The Pentagon has accused Russia of violating the treaty, noting that Russia is also developing nuclear depth charges, torpedoes and anti-aircraft missiles among its 2,000 tactical nukes.

“Russia is also developing at least two new intercontinental range systems, a hypersonic glide vehicle, and a new intercontinental, nuclear-armed, nuclear-powered, undersea autonomous torpedo,” according to the review.

The United States has possessed hundreds of tactical “low-yield” nuclear warheads for decades, but they can only be delivered from planes, including B61 gravity bombs, but are vulnerable because the jets must fly over the target to use them making them susceptible to anti-aircraft missiles and guns.

Currently, only the B-2 stealth bomber can penetrate sophisticated air defenses.

The Trump administration wants to build off the previous administration’s concern that the nuclear force needs to be modernized. It has mapped out plans for the U.S. to spend more than $1.2 trillion over the next 30 years.

In 1982, B-52 bombers were equipped with air-launched cruise missiles, but those weapons are now “more than 25 years past its design life,” according to the review. The newest B-52 is also more than 50 years old, one of the reasons the Pentagon wants a replacement bomber as well replacement for the aging air-launched cruise missile.

The Air Force has 46 nuclear capable B-52H and 20 nuclear-capable B-2A stealth bombers.

Its bomber fleet is not the only aging portion of America’s "nuclear triad."

The 400 Minuteman-III intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs) currently deployed across three Air Force bases in the Midwest were first deployed in 1970 with a planned 10-year service life. They are now expected to last until 2030.

The Navy has 14 Ohio-class ballistic missile submarines capable of carrying 24 Trident D-5 intercontinental ballistic missiles, but are roughly 30 years old.

The new posture review calls for each of these submarines to carry a small number of “low-yield” nuclear warheads, modified from more powerful ones currently inside the Trident missile.

The new missiles could be deployed in the next few years, officials say.

The Pentagon is worried Russia thinks it can use its smaller nukes against NATO in a limited war without a U.S. response.

“Effective U.S. deterrence of Russian nuclear attack … now requires ensuring that the Russian leadership does not miscalculate regarding the consequences of limited nuclear first use,” the review states.

The last nuclear posture review came out just months after President Obama set as a policy goal a world without nuclear weapons in a 2009 speech in Prague.

“Nuclear weapons are the most dangerous legacies of the Cold War," Obama said in the Czech Republic capital. "The U.S. will take concrete steps ... [to] begin the work of reducing our arsenals and stockpiles."

Obama got rid of nuclear-tipped, sea-launched cruise missiles in 2011.

The Pentagon now wants to bring some of those weapons back.

“Every U.S. administration over the past six decades has called for a flexible and limited U.S. nuclear response options,” said the review. “Potential adversaries do not stand still. On the contrary, they seek to identify and exploit weaknesses in U.S. capabilities and strategy.” The U.S. nuclear arsenal cannot remain “fixed.”

Mattis spoke to reporters Friday morning, hours before the release of the Nuclear Posture Review.

"What we're trying to do is ensure that our diplomats and our negotiators are in a position to be listened to when we say we want to go forward on nonproliferation and arms control. At the same time, you do so by having an effective, safe deterrent,” said Mattis.

While not mentioning cyberattack directly, the Pentagon makes clear in this document that the U.S. reserves the right to use nuclear weapons to respond to any attack on infrastructure or population centers, even if that attack uses a conventional weapon.

It also addresses the nuclear threat from China, Iran and North Korea, in addition to Russia.

Any nuclear attack by Kim Jong Un would “result in the end of that regime,” the report says.

Greg Weaver, deputy director of strategic capabilities on the Pentagon’s Joint Staff said “there’s evidence the Russians think that their coercive nuclear use strategy has some prospect of success. We want to make sure that we disabuse them of that idea.”

The two new “low-yield” nuclear weapons are designed to do just that, Weaver said.

A sea-launched nuclear cruise missile could be fired from a warship or a submarine, but is still seven to 10 years from being fielded, said Dr. Robert Soofer, deputy assistant secretary of defense for nuclear policy, in a briefing with reporters ahead of the review’s release.

If Russia returns to compliance with its arms control obligation and reduces its tactical nukes, the U.S. “may reconsider the pursuit” of the sea-launched cruise missile, according to the report.

The Pentagon is hoping history will repeat itself. After the U.S. deployed intermediate-range missiles to Europe, the Soviet Union signed the 1987 INF treaty with the United States. President Reagan’s secretary of state, George P. Shultz, said if not for the deployment of the American missiles, “there would be no incentive for the Soviets to negotiate seriously for nuclear weapons reductions.”

Asked how the Russians were likely to respond to the Pentagon calling for “low-yield” nukes, Soofer replied, “I am sure they won’t respond well.”</s>Feb. 2 (UPI) -- The Pentagon called for the United States to develop two new types of weapons in an update of its nuclear policy Friday.

The new policy -- the first update of the Nuclear Posture Review since 2010 -- pushes modernization of U.S. nuclear weapons, infrastructure and delivery systems. It overturns years of Obama-era policy that sought to reduce the size and power of the United States' nuclear arsenal.

It calls for a "lower-yield" options for ballistic and cruise missiles launched at sea.

"Expanding flexible U.S. nuclear options now, to include low-yield options, is important for the preservation of credible deterrence against regional aggression," the report says.

President Donald Trump ordered Secretary of Defense Jim Mattis to conduct the Nuclear Posture Review one year ago.

In an introductory statement, Mattis said, "We must look reality in the eye and see the world as it is, not as we wish it to be ... in no way does this approach lower the nuclear threshold."

In his own statement, Trump said the updated strategy develops capabilities so that use of a nuclear weapon is less likely.

"It enhances deterrence of strategic attacks against our nation, and our allies and partners, that may not come in the form of nuclear weapons," he said. "And, importantly, it reaffirms our commitment to arms control and nuclear non-proliferation, maintains the moratorium on nuclear testing, and commits to improving efforts to prevent, detect and respond to nuclear terrorism."

During his campaign, Trump promised to expand and strengthen the United States' nuclear arsenal. He repeated that promise Tuesday during his State of the Union speech.

"As part of our defense, we must modernize and rebuild our nuclear arsenal, hopefully never having to use it, but making it so strong and powerful that it will deter any acts of aggression," he said. "Perhaps someday in the future there will be a magical moment when the countries of the world will get together to eliminate their nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, we are not there yet."</s>The Pentagon has released its 2018 Nuclear Posture Review, adding nuclear capabilities and updating the United States’ current arsenal in order to deter nuclear attacks.

“What we’re trying to do is ensure that our diplomats and our negotiators are in a position to be listened to when we say we want to go forward on nonproliferation and arms control,” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told reporters ahead of the review’s release Friday. “You have to do that when you're in a position of persuasion, not of hoping.”

U.S. President Donald Trump said he ordered Mattis to conduct the Nuclear Posture Review within days of taking office last year.

In a statement Friday, Trump noted “successive United States administrations deferred much-needed modernization of our nuclear weapons, infrastructure and delivery systems” while other nuclear nations “grew their stockpiles.”

Trump said the 2018 NPR addresses those challenges.

The 2018 Nuclear Poster Review released Friday notes the U.S. military will use “tailored deterrence” to prevent aggression and attacks across a spectrum of adversaries.

The Pentagon is adding low-yield, or less powerful, nuclear weapons to its submarine-launched cruise missile arsenal, and it will also bring back the nuclear sea-launched cruise missile.

Officials say the addition of low-yield weapons will counter Russia’s perceived belief that it could use its own low-yield weapons against the United States in a limited “first-use” basis that would provide an advantage to Moscow in a low-level conflict without causing U.S. nuclear retaliation.

“Correcting this mistaken Russian perception is a strategic imperative,” according to the review.

The United States’ so-called nuclear triad — the military’s ability to launch and defend nuclear attacks with land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles, submarine-launched ballistic missiles and air-launched cruise missiles — will remain critical to its nuclear deterrence strategy.

The U.S. has begun to replace aging components in each part of the triad: the Ohio-class nuclear submarine is being replaced by Columbia-class nuclear submarines, land-based Minuteman III missiles will start being replaced in 2029 and a new B-21 Raider bomber jet will start replacing old bombers in the mid-2020s, according to the review.

All of these additions and advancements will slowly raise the cost of nuclear deterrence from 2.7 percent of the Defense Department’s budget today to 6.4 percent of the department’s budget in 2029.

U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Patrick Shanahan told reporters Friday that the changes provide a “deterrent that is modern and credible.”

U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Nikki Haley said the NPR will allow the U.S. to remain “flexible and well-prepared for the unique threats we face today. We want to see a world that is free of nuclear weapons, but our nuclear policy needs to be rooted in the reality of the world we live in, where aggressive regimes like North Korea threaten us and our allies with their pursuit of illegal nuclear and ballistic weapons.”

When to use nuclear weapons

In recent years, the United States has reduced its number of nuclear weapons as others, such as Russia and China, have added new nuclear capabilities.

North Korea has continued to pursue nuclear weapons development, and Iran retains much of the capacity needed to develop a nuclear weapon within a year of deciding to do so, according to the review.

The review clarifies the U.S. will use nuclear weapons only in “extreme circumstances,” but those circumstances could include “significant non-nuclear strategic attacks.”

Shanahan argued the clarification was "stabilizing" because he said having a nuclear response option to extreme non-nuclear attacks "lowers the risk of nuclear use by anyone."

When asked to provide examples of non-nuclear attacks that the United States considered significant enough to garner a nuclear response, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy John Rood declined to respond, saying that the United States needed “to maintain some ambiguity” in order to “reinforce deterrence.”

Mattis told reporters the United States should not put all of its focus into defending attacks because it also needs better offensive options that match other countries’ nuclear abilities.

“No football team only plays defense,” Mattis said. “In a competitive situation, you also have to hold at risk, in this case, what North Korea holds dear, to remind them, ‘Don’t do it. Don’t attack us.' "

In a statement Friday, the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons said the Trump nuclear doctrine “deliberately increases” the risk of nuclear weapons use by taking such weapons “out of the silos and onto the battlefield.”

“There are no good nukes and no such thing as a limited nuclear war. That is a myth the nuclear powers want you to believe. The bomb dropped on Hiroshima was ‘low-yield,’ ” the Nobel Peace Prize-winning nongovernmental organization said.

"That's why the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons bans all nuclear weapons, and the threatening of their use. Only that solution will do."</s>The Trump administration has announced a new policy to modernise its nuclear arsenal by developing new smaller atomic bombs and enhancing its deterrence capabilities. The strategy, President Donald Trump said, is tailored and flexible to address the wide array of threats in the 21st century. “It pursues modernisation of our nuclear command, control, and communications, all three legs of our triad, our dual capable aircraft, and our nuclear infrastructure,” said Trump after the the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) was out at the Pentagon.

The strategy develops capabilities aimed at making use of nuclear weapons less likely, he said, adding that it enhances deterrence of strategic attacks against the US, its allies and partners, that may not come in the form of nuclear weapons. “And, importantly, it reaffirms our commitment to arms control and nuclear non-proliferation, maintains the moratorium on nuclear testing, and commits to improving efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to nuclear terrorism,” Trump said.

In his preface to the new policy, that runs into 100 pages, Defence Secretary Jim Mattis said maintaining an effective nuclear deterrent is much less expensive than fighting a war that the US was unable to deter. “While we will be relentless in ensuring our nuclear capabilities are effective, the US is not turning away from its long-held arms control, non-proliferation, and nuclear security objectives,” Mattis said.

“Our commitment to the goals of the treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) remains strong,” he said. Mattis said Russia and China are pursuing entirely new nuclear capabilities tailored to achieve particular national security objectives while also modernising its conventional military, challenging traditional US military superiority. Russia, Mattis said, is modernising these weapons as well as its other strategic systems.

“Even more troubling has been Russia’s adoption of military strategies and capabilities that rely on nuclear escalation for their success,” said Mattis.

“These developments, coupled with Russia’s seizure of Crimea and nuclear threats against our allies, mark Moscow’s decided return to Great Power competition,” he said. North Korea and Iran are the other two countries that figure in the report. There is no mention of Pakistan in the report, even as senior US officials in the past have expressed concerns over the security of nuclear weapons in the South Asian country.

“Expanding flexible US nuclear options now, to include low-yield options, is important for the preservation of credible deterrence against regional aggression,” said the report as released by the Pentagon.

“It will raise the nuclear threshold and help ensure that potential adversaries perceive no possible advantage in limited nuclear escalation, making nuclear employment less likely,” the report said. The US will maintain, and enhance as necessary, the capability to forward deploy nuclear bombers and dual capability aircraft (DCA) around the world, it said.

Additionally, in the near-term, the US will modify a small number of existing SLBM warheads to provide a low-yield option, and in the longer term, pursue a modern nuclear-armed sea-launched cruise missile (SLCM), the report said. For the longer term, the US will pursue a nuclear-armed SLCM, leveraging existing technologies to help ensure its cost effectiveness, according to the report.

“SLCM will provide a needed non-strategic regional presence, an assured response capability. It also will provide an arms control compliant response to Russia’s non-compliance with the Intermediate-range Nuclear Forces Treaty, its non-strategic nuclear arsenal, and its other destabilising behaviours,” the report said. The Nuclear report also said the US will not use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear weapons states that are party to the NPT and in compliance with their nuclear nonproliferation obligations.

Following the release of the report, US Ambassador to the UN, Nikki Haley, said the NPR makes sure the US remains flexible and well prepared for the unique threats it faces today. “We want to see a world that is free of nuclear weapons, but our nuclear policy needs to be rooted in the reality of the world we live in, where aggressive regimes like North Korea threaten us and our allies with their pursuit of illegal nuclear and ballistic weapons,” said Haley.

“While we have continued to reduce the size of our nuclear arsenal, countries like Russia and China have moved in the opposite direction. The NPR appropriately addresses the nature of these threats and ensures that the safety and security of the American people remain our top priority,” she said.

In a special briefing with reporters at the Pentagon, Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Tom Shannon, said that in addition to China and Russia, other “unfriendly regimes and enemies of the US put lives at risk by pursuing nuclear weapons”.

“North Korea continues its illicit nuclear weapons programme and missile capabilities. Iran retains the technological capability to develop a nuclear weapon within one year of deciding to do so,” Shannon said. He said that nuclear terrorism is still a major threat in the 21st century and countries need to work to mitigate it.

“The potential threat of non-state actors getting their hands on a nuclear weapon remains at the front of all of our minds,” Shannon said.

“Because of the dangerous world we live in and our unwavering commitment to our allies, the 2018 NPR focuses on strengthening extended deterrence,” he said. The US has formal extended deterrence commitments that assure European, Asian and Pacific allies of its commitment to use nuclear force to protect them, if necessary.

Ongoing, close collaboration with allies and partners is essential to deterring or defeating the common threats they face, said Shannon, noting that this collaboration includes sustained dialogues and joint military exercises.

“But we also realise that every ally and partner faces a different threat environment. We will continue to work with them to tailor our assurance strategies in ways that are most effective for their specific situation,” he said. Shannon said the US remains committed to the allies under its nuclear umbrella. “Our extended deterrence commitments are unwavering. We have the ability and will to fulfil them. Potential adversaries should not doubt our resolve,” Shannon said.

For all the latest World News, download Indian Express App
The United States releases a new policy on nuclear arms, the first update since 2010. It calls for the introduction of two new types of weapons in the U.S. nuclear arsenal: low-yield nuclear submarine-launched ballistic (SLBM) and cruise (SLCM) missiles.