Perhaps the most dangerous weapons program the US government has recently pursued involves a low-yield nuclear warhead for submarine-launched nuclear missiles. The arguments against development of such “small nukes” are legion and overwhelmingly compelling. In fact, almost exactly one year ago, I laid out some of those arguments in an article headlined, “Mini-nukes: The attempted resurrection of a terrible idea.” And, I said then, don’t just take my word for it; read the analysis of Jim Doyle, a former longtime technical staffer at the Los Alamos National Laboratory. Simply put, the availability of “small” nuclear warheads increases the likelihood that nuclear weapons will be used, and any use of nuclear weapons easily could (some experts might say “inevitably would”) lead to general nuclear war and the end of civilization.
In the last year, however, the Trump administration released a Nuclear Posture Review calling for development of a low-yield warhead for submarine-launched ballistic missiles. Congress subsequently passed a defense authorization act that includes money for the program, and another bill allocates millions in the Energy Department budget specifically for pursuit of the new warhead.
A group of congressional Democrats introduced bills in the House and Senate this week that would prohibit the Trump administration from following through on the low-yield submarine-launched nuke. As reported in The Hill, the congressmen made stirring and sensible comments in support of the small nuke ban. For instance, California Rep. Ted Lieu said, “There’s no such thing as a low-yield nuclear war. Use of any nuclear weapon, regardless of its killing power, could be catastrophically destabilizing. It opens the door for severe miscalculation and could drag the US and our allies into a devastating nuclear conflict.”
Lieu and his colleagues (and the many military leaders who oppose, for all sorts of intelligent reasons, a sub-launched mini-nuke) are right. Just the same, there is essentially zero chance the bill banning that low-yield warhead will even be considered in the current Republican-controlled Congress. But politics change over time. It would be good for the country and the world if major news media focused prominently on the extreme danger this low-yield nuclear warhead program poses. The risk of that program is not theoretical, and the result, if such weapons are developed and fielded, could be truly catastrophic. The more people become aware of the threat that mini-nukes pose to them, their children, and the planet, the more likely that this mistaken program can be defunded and put back on the shelf of bad ideas, where it belongs and should stay.
The Bulletin elevates expert voices above the noise. But as an independent, nonprofit media organization, our operations depend on the support of readers like you. Help us continue to deliver quality journalism that holds leaders accountable. Your support of our work at any level is important. In return, we promise our coverage will be understandable, influential, vigilant, solution-oriented, and fair-minded. Together we can make a difference.