News

2018-01-01

New START and the Nuclear Triad: The U.S. Perspective

The 2010 Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty between the United States and the Russian Federation (New START) is aimed at reducing the nuclear arms arsenal of both countries. The United States is in the process of reducing the number of its long-range missiles and bombers warheads. The terms of the New START Treaty therefore enable it to develop new delivery systems for deployment over the next 20-30 years.

In his Reuters interview of February 23, 2017, US President Donald Trump said: “We’ve fallen behind on nuclear weapon capacity. I am the first one that would like to see nobody have nukes, but we’re never going to fall behind any country even if it’s a friendly country… if countries are going to have nukes, we’re going to be at the top of the pack.”

This was the first time the US president made publicly known his stance on the New START Treaty, calling it a one-sided deal. Indeed, White House spokesman Sean Spicer announced at a regular briefing on February 23 last year that the president was very clear the United States would not yield to anybody its supremacy in nuclear warfare.

New START conditions

New START requires that by February 5, 2018, the US and Russia must limit their strategic nuclear weapon arsenals to equal levels for 10 years. Each party is permitted to have no more than 700 operationally deployed alongside 100 non-deployed means of delivery.

During the Cold War, the U.S. nuclear arsenal contained various strategic nuclear delivery vehicles: longer-range systems, including long-range missiles based on U.S. territory; long-range missiles based on submarines; and heavy bombers to threaten Soviet targets from their bases in the United States. In 1990, the United States deployed a total of around 12,304 warheads on its ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers. With START, that number has declined to less than 1,600 warheads today and 1,550 warheads by 2018 after the new treaty is completely implemented.

The Treaty includes inspection and verifications procedures, allowing each side to ensure the other complies with the limits. New START expires in 2021, but can be prolonged by five years if both sides agree to do it.

Nuclear Triad Modernisation

Nonetheless, the US now plans to launch a $1 trillion, 30-year modernisation of its nuclear triad. The three components of the delivery of its strategic nuclear arsenal consists of land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), strategic bombers and submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs).

A traditional nuclear strategy holds that a nuclear triad provides the best level of deterrence from attack. In reality, most nuclear powers do not have the military budget to sustain a full triad as only the United States and Russia have maintained nuclear triads for most of the nuclear age.

Legs of the Triad

A three-branched nuclear capability aims to reduce significantly the possibility that an enemy could destroy a nation’s entire nuclear force in a first-strike attack. The intention is to ensure the credible threat of a second strike so increasing the nation’s nuclear deterrence.

Both the US and the Soviet Union have composed their triads along the same lines to include the three components or ‘legs’ . Here is a detailed look at the U.S components of the nuclear triad.:

• ICBM

Land-based ICBMs are silo-housed, long-range missiles located in controlled or allied territory. Presently, the U.S. land-based ballistic missile force consists of 414 Minuteman III ICBMs, each deployed with one warhead. The fleet will decline to 400 deployed missiles and 450 launchers to meet the terms of New START.

Due to their geographical dispersion in the US and nuclear blast proof silos, ICBMs are well protected against first strike attacks and noted for their low relative cost per use. Each Minuteman III missile was initially deployed with 3 warheads, making a total of 1,500 warheads across the force.

In 2001, the United States removed 2 warheads from each of the 150 Minuteman missiles at F.E. Warren AFB to meet the START limit of 6,000 warheads, so reducing the Minuteman III force to 1,200 total warheads. USAF has also removed and destroyed the “bulkhead” platform on the re-entry vehicle to ensure that these missiles can no longer carry three warheads in accordance with START rules.

USAF is now modernizing the Minuteman missiles, replacing and upgrading their rocket motors and guidance systems so that they can remain in the force until 2030 when they will be replaced with a new Ground-based Strategic Deterrent. However, many argue that the Air Force should abolish the ICBM force completely due to the difficulty of launching ICBMs over Russia without destabilization.

Moreover, the fact that ICBMs suffer from “targeting inflexibility” which greatly limits their strategic value. Former Secretary of Defense William Perry believes that modernization spending would be wasteful because strategic bombers and SLBMs provide more effective and sustainable means of nuclear deterrence.

• Strategic Bombers

Bombers can function both as first and second-strike attackers quickly deployed and recalled in response to last-minute decisions. They can also carry both nuclear cruise missiles and more conventional weapons allowing the Air Force to utilize them during non-nuclear missions.

The U.S. fleet of heavy bombers includes 20 B-2 bombers and 76 B-52 bombers, but the fleet will decline to around 60 aircraft in coming years when the US implements New START. The Air Force has also begun to retire the nuclear-armed cruise missiles carried by B-52 bombers, leaving only about half the B-52 fleet equipped to carry nuclear weapons.

The Air Force plans to procure a new long-range bomber and cruise missile during the 2020s. DOE is also modifying and extending the life of the B61 bomb carried on B-2 bombers and fighter aircraft alongside the W80 warhead for cruise missiles.

The B-2 Bomber

The B-2 Spirit is a multi-role bomber capable of delivering both conventional and nuclear munitions. The B-2 bomber can carry both B61 and B83 nuclear bombs, while unequipped to carry cruise missiles.

It continues to serve as a penetrating bomber, both when flying conventional missions and supporting nuclear deterrent missions. USAF has indicated the requirement of significant maintenance and modernization funding to support the mission.

According to unclassified estimates, the United States has approximately 475 B61 and B83 bombs in different versions. The B61-7 serves as a strategic bomb carried by B-2 bombers. The B61-3, 4 and 10 are considered non-strategic bombs, with lower yields to be delivered by fighter aircraft like the F-16 and F-35.

The B61-11 modification was developed in the 1990s as a modified case to penetrate some hardened targets, although those probably not encased in steel and concrete. The B61-Mod 7, Mod-3, Mod-4 and Mod-10 versions are a part of an ongoing life extension program (LEP) to produce a new B61-mod 12 bomb. As the largest bomb remaining in the US arsenal, the B83 is likely to be retired around 2025 after the completion of the B61 LEP.

The Obama Administration strongly supported the life extension program for the B-61 bomb in the Nuclear Posture Review report to fund “the full scope LEP study and to ensure first production begins in FY2017”. This life extension program includes enhancing safety, security and use control, while supporting U.S. extended deterrence goals by retaining the capability to forward-deploy U.S. nuclear weapons on B-2 bombers and tactical fighter-bombers.

USAF is also designing a new tail kit for the B61 bomb. This equipment would replace the parachute that the bomb currently uses to slow to its targets and would thus improve the weapon’s accuracy. The B-2 has a crew of two pilots, a pilot in the left seat and mission commander in the right, compared to the B-1B’s crew of four and the B-52’s crew of five.

The B-52 Bomber

The B-52 bomber first entered service in 1961, equipped to carry nuclear or conventional air-launched cruise missiles and nuclear-armed advanced cruise missiles. It can also deliver a wide range of conventional arms, now receiving numerous upgrades to its communications and electronics systems.

The B-52 bomber was equipped to carry both the Air-Launched cruise missile (ALCM) and Advanced Cruise Missile (ACM). The ACM had a modified design with a lower radar cross-section, making it more “stealthy” than the ALCM. The Department of Defense has now decided to retire many of these missiles, with the ALCM sustained in the fleet through 2030, then to be replaced by a new advanced long-range standoff (LRSO) cruise missile.

According to DOD, USAF has recently completed an analysis of alternatives (AOA) to “define the platform requirements, provide cost-sensitive comparisons, validate threats and establish measures of effectiveness” for the new missile. It has added funding for the LRSO to accelerate the program by two years to begin deployments in the mid-2020s and place a higher priority on this program because the existing ALCM is beginning to show reliability problems.

B-52 will continue to serve as the backbone of the nuclear and conventional bomber force for many years to come, to 2050 and beyond.

The B-21 Bomber

The US currently deploys two types of heavy bombers, the B-2 and B-52, to deliver both nuclear and conventional weapons. The B-1 was initially equipped to deliver nuclear weapons exclusively dedicated to conventional missions. USAF has employed all three aircraft in conventional conflicts over the past two decades, but they are aging and may not be sufficient to meet emerging challenges.

USAF has thus begun to develop a new strategic bomber, known as the B-21 Raider; hoping to field between 80 and 100 of the new bombers from 2025. It announced on October 27, 2015 that it had awarded the initial production contract of 21 bombers to Northrup Grumman. The new bomber will probably not include nuclear capabilities initially, but it will add them as the B-2 and B-52 bombers are retired from the fleet in the name of developing a new bomber for longer-range strike missions.

• SLBM (submarine-launched ballistic missiles)

The U.S. ballistic missile submarine fleet currently consists of 14 Trident submarines, each carrying 24 Trident II (D-5) missiles. The Navy has converted 4 of the original 18 Trident submarines to carry non-nuclear cruise missiles. The remaining carry around 1,000 warheads in total; a number declining as the United States implements the New START Treaty.

The Navy has shifted the basing of the submarines, meaning that nine are deployed in the Pacific Ocean and five in the Atlantic to ensure better cover targets in and around Asia. It also has undertaken efforts to extend the life of the missiles and warheads so that they and the submarines can remain in the fleet past 2020. Moreover, it is designing a new submarine and will replace the existing fleet beginning in 2031.

The SLBM is often considered the most critical leg of the triad because submarines are very difficult to track and destroy, making them almost invulnerable to first strike attacks and increasing their value as a second-strike attacker. Initially, due to the nature of a floating submarine, the SLBM was the least accurate delivery vehicle limited by the difficulty of obtaining accurate targeting data. Now, with improved guidance and communications, the accuracy of SLBMs is almost on a par with that of an ICBM.

Despite their effectiveness, SLBMs represent the smallest component of the triad with only 14 deployed Trident submarines owing to their expense. While the majority of SLBMs are not as old as the B-52 bomber, there is no question of their needing modernization. In recognition of this reality, the US Navy has begun to design a new Columbia-class submarine that will serve to replace the existing Ohio-class fleet.

Some argue that the United States should reduce the size of its SLBM fleet and retain only 8 or 10 submarines. Both this reduction and the future acquisition of fewer replacement submarines could save the Navy $6 billion-$7 billion over the next 10 years. They also note that this change need not reduce the number of operational warheads on SLBMs because the United States would deploy each submarine with 24 missiles, rather than the 20 planned under New START, so increasing the number of warheads on each missile.

However, with so few submarines, the United States might have to eliminate one of its submarine bases, leaving it with submarines based only in the Atlantic or the Pacific Ocean. Moreover, the United States might have to reduce the number of submarines on station and the number of warheads promptly available to the President at the start of a conflict. Unfortunately, these changes may not be consistent with current submarine operations and employment plans.

Conclusion: Debatable Triad

There now appears to be a broad base of agreement about the magnitude of the costs that the United States is likely to incur as it modernizes its nuclear arsenal. However, there is little agreement about whether the United States can, or should, proceed with each of these programs.

All three legs are aging and require vast amounts of capital to maintain. Over the next 30 years, it is estimated that the US will spend over $1 trillion to modernize the nuclear triad. Nonetheless, others argue that the United States cannot afford to bear either the costs of these systems or the costs of failing to modernize its nuclear arsenal.

Admiral Haney, the Commander of Strategic Command, made this point in a hearing before the House Armed Services Committee, when he confirmed that “achieving strategic deterrence in the 21st century requires continued investment in strategic capabilities and renewed multigenerational commitment of intellectual capital”.

In the face of fundamental questions regarding the effectiveness of US nuclear deterrence against modern day threats like terrorists and rogue regimes, many have started to question the relevance of the nuclear triad. It is thus still to be determined how the size and structure of the nuclear triad will be transformed in the coming years.

In the next issue, we will discuss the Russian Nuclear Triad in detail…

Reference Photo/Text:

www.dtic.mil

www.beoing.com

www.northropgrumman.com

www.wikipedia.org

Comments () Views (4844 ) Print

Send To Friend