Biden’s first budget should reduce excessive expenditure on nuclear weaponry

Biden’s first budget should reduce nuclear excess, Defense News, By: Kingston Reif, 5 Mar 21, As the Biden administration begins crafting its defense budget submission for fiscal 2022, the debate about how it should handle the U.S. nuclear arsenal is heating up.

Proponents of the Trump administration’s approach, which fanned the flames of a burgeoning arms race, are warning any deviations will lead to disaster.

President Joe Biden, however, appears to have a different view. During the campaign, he said the United States “does not need new nuclear weapons” and that his “administration will work to maintain a strong, credible deterrent while reducing our reliance and excessive expenditure on nuclear weapons.”

Biden is right. Current U.S. nuclear weapons policies exceed what is necessary for a credible nuclear deterrent, and their financial costs are taking a growing toll. Biden should use his forthcoming budget to steer the country in a safer and more affordable direction.

In addition to continuing legacy plans to replace the nuclear triad and its associated warheads, the Trump administration pursued new types of weapons and more bomb-making infrastructure. It also expanded the circumstances in which President Donald Trump would consider using nuclear weapons. Worse still, the administration put New START — the sole remaining agreement verifiably limiting the size of the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals — on the brink of expiration.

Mindful of the danger he inherited, Biden quickly and wisely agreed with Russian President Vladimir Putin to extend New START by five years.

Trump’s FY21 budget request of $44.5 billion to sustain and upgrade the nuclear arsenal was a 19 percent increase over the previous year. Over the next several decades, spending is likely to top $1.5 trillion.

Russian and Chinese nuclear advances and aggressive behavior might seem to justify such investments. But the spending plans pose a major threat to security priorities more relevant to countering Moscow and Beijing and assuring allies. A long-foreseen budget reckoning has arrived.

Press reports indicate the Pentagon has begun a mini-review of the nuclear enterprise, with a focus on low-yield weapons and nuclear command and control, to inform the FY22 budget request slated for release in early May.

An early reassessment of the Trump administration’s dubious proposal to double the number of more usable low-yield nuclear options is more than justified. In particular, the Biden administration should provide no funding to begin development of a new nuclear-armed, sea-launched cruise missile. The weapon, which is projected to cost at least $9 billion over the next decade, is a redundant and costly hedge on a hedge.

But the mini-review should go further and hit pause on other controversial programs, pending the outcome of a more comprehensive policy review later this year. For example, the administration should freeze funding for the Air Force’s program to build a new land-based intercontinental ballistic missile system at the current-year level. It should also set the budget for the National Nuclear Security Administration at the level projected for FY22 as of the FY20 budget request……………. https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2021/03/04/bidens-first-budget-should-reduce-nuclear-excess/

March 6, 2021 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | politics, USA, weapons and war

No comments yet.

nuclear-news

The News That Matters about the Nuclear Industry Fukushima Chernobyl Mayak Three Mile Island Atomic Testing Radiation Isotope