July 21, 2016
Is The No First Use Policy the Right Policy?
By Peter Huessy
Should the United States adopt a new policy of pledging never to use nuclear weapons first in a conflict? The Arms Control Association (ACA) thinks so. They argue that since there is no need for the US to go first with the use of nuclear weapons, why don’t we simply make it official and declare it as US policy?
They argue—quite correctly-- that because “it is well established that U.S. nuclear forces and command-and-control systems could withstand even a massive attack” there is no reason to strike first because “…the remaining nuclear force would be more than sufficient to deliver a devastating blow to any nuclear aggressor.”
But on the other hand, if our nuclear forces are structured in such a way to avoid any pressures to go first, what problem is ACA trying to solve beyond the symbolism of such a “no first use” declaration? And furthermore, could such a declaration worsen strategic stability, making conflict more likely?
http://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2016/07/21/is_the_no_first_use_policy_the_right_policy_109602.html
