For nuclear deterrence, US policymakers must rely on facts, not hype
Washington finds itself in another season of hearings related to nuclear weapons, as Congressional leaders consider approving new defense appointees, negotiate the federal budget and hold annual hearings with military leaders.
Such hearings are important, especially from a strategic perspective. Maintaining deterrence requires clear-eyed assessments of our own nuclear and conventional weapons, their doctrines for use, the health of the enterprise that operates them and the trade-offs inherent in all defense investments. This challenging work requires that policymakers plan against facts and best judgments, and avoid being distracted by misleading claims regarding the U.S. nuclear arsenal and those of other nations. Three chief narrative claims threaten to send Washington down costly, inefficient and indeed risky policy paths today.
The first theme, which seemingly reemerges each year, is that U.S. nuclear weapons are ancient, and that this necessitates urgent action.
This is true — Many U.S. nuclear weapons and their delivery systems are quite old. In these critical debates, this is sometimes portrayed as a new realization, and a problem for which the U.S. isn't yet pursuing solutions.
In fact, this is a long-recognized challenge that the nation has been tackling with concerted action for years. At sites in Texas, Missouri, New Mexico, California and elsewhere, scientists, technicians and manufacturers are executing an expansive modernization of all three legs of the nuclear triad, to the tune of at least $1.7 trillion. The nation has been pursuing these plans for many years — long enough, in fact, that the real needs and costs of nuclear modernization become clearer each year.
Second, policymakers will hear a rising chorus claiming that the U.S. does not have tactical nuclear weapons — or that we need even more. Both assertions are misleading, and several facts must remain central to any renewed policy debate on this subject.
Just this January, the National Nuclear Security Administration announced that production is complete for upgraded B61-12 nuclear gravity bombs, which have the ability to be used with heightened precision and lower explosive yields, enabling tactical utility. The head of the agency publicly declared that they are 'fully forward deployed.'
That's not all. During the first Trump administration, the U.S. quickly developed and fielded a low-yield variant of submarine-launched Trident II missiles. Additionally, development and testing continue for a new long-range standoff nuclear air-launched cruise missile, with the aim of it becoming operable by 2030.
Washington pursued each of these nuclear capabilities with scenarios in mind that included adversaries using tactical nuclear weapons in conflict, and the need for the nation to have multiple types of response options available.
The U.S. had — and chose to reduce — tactical nuclear weapons in the past, decisions that stemmed from deep military analysis, as well as knowledge of the operational, budgetary and weapons-capability trade-offs the military faced. These decisions also tied to the emergence and improvement of other technologies, including stealth, precision conventional weapons and the growth centrality of space in defense strategy and operations. These factors are only growing in importance in considering what nuclear capabilities are necessary for effective deterrence.
Third, making hard decisions regarding U.S. investments toward deterrence requires the most precise accounting of the nuclear capabilities of countries like China and Russia that we can achieve — and measured consideration of how to handle any knowledge gaps we have.
For example, some experts portray as a proven fact that China has nuclear weapons that are at serious risk of being fielded as tactical, battlefield weapons in conflict. This is not a settled fact, and it is a matter of hot debate. China has long avoided developing some types of nuclear weapons, such as those delivered by tactical cruise missiles. Its doctrine historically considered nuclear weapons to be solely strategic, and held firm to the concept that use of nuclear weapons was beyond the normal threshold for acceptable combat. And indeed, some of its recent actions raise concerns about whether the nation's leaders have altered course.
Still, no one in the U.S. concretely knows the answer to this or other questions about China's nuclear capabilities and concepts of use. It will likely take the type of dialogues that President Trump has proposed, as well as sustained technical and political engagement at all levels, to gain clarity. Until that happens, in the name of maintaining deterrence, policymakers should be careful to discern what we know and what remains unclear in our knowledge of these nations' nuclear capabilities.
Our nation's leaders face tough questions about how to keep deterrence stable and effective in an extraordinarily complex security environment. It will indeed require modernizing parts of the nuclear arsenal. However, the more-is-better style of arms racing that the U.S. and Soviet Union pursued in the Cold War is not a fit for modern strategy. Initiating plans for nuclear weapons that exceed our capacity to build or maintain them does nothing to enhance deterrence and may risk strategic miscommunication.
With this in mind, the nation can also benefit from the fact that we stand at a moment of strong, bipartisan agreement on numerous policy paths that aim to keep deterrence as effective as possible.
For example, there is broad agreement that the U.S. should pursue defense acquisition reform and seek to out-innovate adversarial nations, both subjects for which Trump recently signed executive orders. The nation's nuclear weapons plans and policies should not be exempt from these important pursuits or the trade-offs they will entail.
Second, there is significant agreement that the U.S. needs to invest more in its science, technology and industrial base that keeps the nuclear deterrent strong and secure. This must be adequately reflected in forthcoming budgets that support the national laboratories, the Department of Energy, the National Nuclear Security Administration and other relevant infrastructure.
Third, most experts agree on the need to be creative in how we pursue deterrence, across nuclear and non-nuclear domains. Though some experts focus heavily on building more nuclear weapons as the primary answer, many of us agree that we should first maximize other approaches to complicating the decision-making of adversaries in ways that keep them back from the nuclear brink. This should include creative approaches to signaling U.S. capabilities and determination (including technical and strategic capabilities other than weapons systems), sharp messaging from senior leaders, and showcasing dedication to long-standing military alliances.
While there is much work to do, we are already fifteen years into the implementation of a bipartisan program of record for a U.S. nuclear arsenal that is safe, secure and effective. By pursuing that program and the priorities noted above, our deterrent will remain second to none.
Hon. Andy Weber is a senior fellow at the Council on Strategic Risks and previously served as assistant secretary of defense for nuclear, chemical and biological defense programs.
Christine Parthemore is the CEO of the Council on Strategic Risks and previously served at the Pentagon.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Tulsi Gabbard Flips Sides in MAGA Civil War Over Iran's Nuclear Capabilities
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has flipped her stance on Iran after President Donald Trump nuked her intelligence as 'wrong.' Gabbard told the Senate Intelligence Committee on March 25 that there was no intelligence to suggest Iran was building nuclear weapons, though the country had enriched its uranium to higher levels. Following Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's June 12 'preemptive' strike on Iran—which he justified by saying that the country has a 'secret plan' to weaponize uranium—Trump sided with Israel's countervailing position. On two separate occasions this week, Trump rebuffed Gabbard's earlier assessment of Iran's nuclear program. 'I don't care what [Gabbard] said,' Trump said aboard Air Force One. 'I think they were very close to having one.' In another comment on Wednesday, the president added that Iran was 'a few weeks' away from turning their uranium into a weapon, echoing similar sentiments shared by Netanyahu. Then on Friday, Gabbard fell in line with Trump, attacking the media for having the gall to believe what she said. 'The dishonest media is intentionally taking my testimony out of context and spreading fake news as a way to manufacture division,' Gabbard wrote to her 600K followers. 'America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly.' She added, 'President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree.' Gabbard included a clip of what she called her 'full testimony,' which has since racked up 8.9 million views. The world has been thrown into a state of limbo while Trump weighs a decision on whether to get the United States involved in strikes on Iran, a decision the country warned would be 'very dangerous.' In a statement read on Thursday by White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt, Trump said he would make his decision 'within the next two weeks' based on the fact that there 'is a substantial chance of negotiations that may or may not take place with Iran in the near future.' Reuters reported that the Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi met with a group of European diplomats in Geneva on Friday for nuclear talks.
Newsweek
22 minutes ago
- Newsweek
US B-2 Stealth Bombers on the Move Across Pacific
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. As the fighting between Israel and Iran continues, six B-2 stealth bombers departed Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri and are en route to Guam, according to U.S. officials confirmed to Fox News and flight tracking data analyzed by multiple news outlets. Newsweek reached out the Pentagon's Defense Press Operations office and the White House via email on Saturday for comment. NITRO KC135s returning to Altus AFB, OK B2s MYTEE11 FLT & MYTEE21 FLT continuing westbound to destination Andersen AFB, Guam. — Aircraft Spots (@AircraftSpots) June 21, 2025 Why It Matters This month, the conflict between Israel and Iran has escalated dramatically, with President Donald Trump calling for the evacuation of Tehran, Iran's capital city home to over 9.5 million people. Israel initially struck Tehran and several other cities in "Operation Rising Lion," a campaign it said was meant to preempt a planned Iranian attack and disrupt Iran's nuclear capabilities. Iran, which has said its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes, has since retaliated, though Israeli defense systems—bolstered by U.S. military technology—have intercepted about 99 percent of incoming missile fire, according to Israeli officials on Saturday morning in an X, formerly Twitter, post. Iran hit a hospital in southern Israel on Thursday, and local reports noted that buildings in Tel Aviv were on fire from Iranian missiles on Friday. Israel's strikes have killed at least 585 people in Iran—including 239 civilians—and wounded another 1,300, according to a human rights group that has long tracked the country, Washington-based Human Rights Activists. Iran's government has not offered overall casualty figures. Israel has said 24 people have been killed since Friday and 500 more have been wounded, according to Israeli officials. The U.S. is Israel's closest ally, providing billions of dollars in military aid annually. Following the 1979 Iranian Revolution, diplomatic relations between the U.S. and Iran disintegrated, and the two countries have held strained, distrusting relations over the past four-decades. Iran's nuclear program has long been a focal point of U.S. and Israeli concern, with Iran insisting its efforts are solely for energy purposes. The second Trump administration had been involved in talks with Iran ahead of the conflict, although no formal diplomacy has come out of it. During his first presidency, Trump withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. B-2s and Bunker-Buster Bombs The B-2 can carry two 15-ton bunker-buster bombs—which only the U.S. possesses, making these aircraft critical to any potential operation against Iran's most fortified nuclear sites. Officials and experts have suggested that the U.S.'s 30,000-pound (13,000kg) bunker-buster bomb is the only weapon capable of destroying the Fordow Fuel Enrichment Plant, a facility believed to be central to Tehran's nuclear program and carved deep into a mountain. The movement signals the U.S. may be positioning military assets to provide Trump with operational options as the Israel-Iran conflict intensifies. A B-2 Stealth Bomber opens the 135th Rose Parade Presented by Honda on January 1, 2024, in Pasadena, California. A B-2 Stealth Bomber opens the 135th Rose Parade Presented by Honda on January 1, 2024, in Pasadena, To Know The bombers apparently refueled after launching from Missouri, suggesting they launched without full fuel tanks due to a heavy onboard payload, which could potentially be bunker-buster bombs. The deployment comes as Trump prepares to meet with his national security team to discuss potential U.S. involvement in Israeli strikes against Iranian nuclear facilities. According to The New York Times, air traffic control communications showed the B-2 aircraft taking off from Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. Iran's most advanced and hardened nuclear facility, the Fordow plant in the country's northwest, is a fortress. Built inside a mountain some 300 feet underground and reinforced by layers of concrete, the plant, which is the most likely target of a potential American strike, is impenetrable by any bomb except the GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP). The B-2 Spirit, a U.S. stealth bomber, is currently the only aircraft designed to deploy the GBU-57 and can carry two bunker buster bombs at a time. Military experts note that destroying such fortified targets would likely require multiple precision strikes at the exact same location. Earlier on Saturday, Israel launched a wave of airstrikes against missile sites and a nuclear facility in Iran, while Iran fired a barrage of ballistic missiles and launched drones into Israel. What People Are Saying Director of National Intelligence (DNI) Tulsi Gabbard wrote on X on Friday: "America has intelligence that Iran is at the point that it can produce a nuclear weapon within weeks to months, if they decide to finalize the assembly. President Trump has been clear that can't happen, and I agree." President Donald Trump earlier this week wrote on Truth Social: "We know exactly where the so-called 'Supreme Leader' is hiding. He is an easy target, but is safe there - We are not going to take him out (kill!), at least not for now. But we don't want missiles shot at civilians, or American soldiers. Our patience is wearing thin. Thank you for your attention to this matter!" Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, in a national address, in part: "We warn America of the consequences of engaging in war, because it will suffer severe damage if it decides to do so. War is met with war, bombing with bombing, and strike with strike." Iran's foreign minister Abbas Araghchi on X on Wednesday: "Iran solely acts in self-defense. Even in the face of the most outrageous aggression against our people, Iran has so far only retaliated against the Israeli regime and not those who are aiding and abetting it. Just like Netanyahu manufactured this war to destroy diplomacy, the world should be highly alarmed about increasing attempts by the failing Israeli regime to get others to bail it out and to expand the flames to the region and beyond." What Happens Next Trump will make a decision on whether to have the U.S. join Israel's war with Iran "within the next two weeks," according to White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt, who told reporters Thursday that the decision is based on Trump's view of whether Iran "may" or "may not" agree to a diplomatic resolution through negotiations over its nuclear program. The president is expected to receive intelligence briefings with the National Security Council (NSC) over the weekend as he considers possible actions against Iran.
Hamilton Spectator
30 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Rejecting Trump's rhetoric, Maine's governor heads to Maritimes to build ties
HALIFAX - Maine's governor is heading to the Maritimes next week with hopes a charm offensive will slow the rapid drop in Canadian tourist visits to her state. In a release issued Friday, Janet Mills says she's aware the historically close relationship between New England and its northern neighbours has been challenged by U.S. president Donald Trump's tariffs and his rhetoric about Canada becoming the 51st state. According to U.S. federal border crossing data released Friday, 85,000 fewer Canadians entered Maine in May than in the same month a year ago, a drop of about 27 per cent. The governor says she will spend three days meeting with premiers, appearing in local media and visiting businesses in hope of sending a message that Maritimers remain 'welcome in Maine' despite Trump's trade policies. On Monday, the governor will stop in Saint John, N.B., where she intends to visit businesses with links to Maine and she then will travel to Fredericton to hold talks with New Brunswick Premier Susan Holt. On Wednesday, Mills will meet with Nova Scotia Premier Tim Houston in Halifax and tour a marine technology centre. Last month, the governor unveiled new, bilingual signs welcoming Canadian visitors, which are being placed in windows around the state. On June 13, in her weekly radio address, Mills said she wants to ensure the 'historic friendship and deeply intertwined economies last for generations to come.' 'It's not just our economies – we are connected so deeply by mutual economic advantages and on centuries-old familial, cuisine, language, and cultural bonds that far supersede politics,' she told her listeners, reminding them that Canada is the United States' closest and most important trading partner. The Democratic Party member said Trump's 'roller coaster tariffs' are unsettling business in her state and 'making our Canadian neighbors feel unwelcome in the United States.' In 2024, nearly 800,000 Canadian visitors spent approximately US$498 million in Maine, according to the state's Office of Tourism. Overall, the data showed Maine welcomed 14.8 million visitors, who spent more than US$9.2 billion, supporting 115,900 jobs and generating US$5.4 billion in wages. This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 21, 2025. Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
