Is Bush a New Nuclear Threat to the World
In the last year alone, the Bush Administration has ushered
in new and profoundly reckless nuclear weapons policies that blur the distinction
between conventional war and nuclear war, make escalating nuclear proliferation
a near certainty, and will revive the arms race and threaten the world for years
to come.
Now those policy proposals are working their way into the legislative process.
Congress is debating funding for new "Earth Penetrating" nuclear warheads,
while the weapons labs are seeking to build new "mini-nukes." There
is still time to stop these destabilizing developments, but this year is absolutely
critical. If the new Bush nuclear weapons policies take hold, stopping them will
grow increasingly difficult.
The world managed to survive the Cold War and almost fifty years of nuclear confrontation
between the United States and the Soviet Union. While millions of people lost
their lives in wars around the world during this period of superpower competition,
the ultimate disaster of nuclear war was averted. Now, little more than ten years
after the collapse of the Soviet Union, we stand on the brink of a whole new era
of nuclear proliferation.
On March 9th, the Los Angeles Times broke the story on the Administration's new
"Nuclear Posture Review" which calls for targeting China, Russia, Iraq,
Iran, North Korea Libya and Syria for a potential first strike. The Review spells
out U.S. plans to "build smaller nuclear weapons for use in certain battlefield
situations," even against non-nuclear powers. It says nuclear weapons could
be used in three situations: against targets able to withstand non-nuclear attack;
in retaliation for attack with nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons; or "in
the event of surprising military developments."
In June, in a commencement address at West Point, President Bush declared that
the U.S. must be willing to take pre-emptive military action against any nation
perceived as a threat. This policy statement profoundly threatens the foundations
of international law. One need only look back at the Clinton Administration's
cruise missile attack on Sudan, based on faulty intelligence, to see the peril
of this approach.
The result of these new policies is certain to be a rapid increase in the pace
of nuclear proliferation. Targeted nations are likely to accelerate weapons programs
to deter U.S. attack by ensuring that they can deliver devastating blows to the
U.S. - with or without ballistic missiles. China, for example, says it will increase
its nuclear arsenal because the U.S. strategy mentions possible interventions
in Asia. Such a build-up of Chinese nuclear arms will almost certainly be matched
by India, followed by Pakistan. An expanding nuclear arms race in Asia will pose
grave new dangers on that continent as well as creating an incentive for other
nations to join the "nuclear club."
Action
Congress is currently considering funding for a new nuclear weapon called the
Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (RNEP). The RNEP is designed for the express purpose
of a first strike against an underground target. Funding for the RNEP will be
resolved in the Defense Authorization Conference. The House of Representatives
has approved funding for this new, "usable" nuclear weapon; the Senate
has not. Contact the California members of the House Armed Services Committees
(Ellen Tauscher, Loretta Sanchez, Mike Thompson, Susan Davis, "Buck"
McKeon, Duncan Hunter and Ken Calvert) and urge them not to authorize funding
for the RNEP.
Representative Ed Markey (D-MA) has introduced House Joint Resolution 97 which
calls for an over-all change in US nuclear policy; it includes an end to the development
of new nuclear weapons, adoption of a no first use policy, and the destruction
of nuclear weapons withdrawn under treaty. Urge your Representative (find
your Representative)to co-sponsor H.J. Res. 97 today.
Voice of Freedom