27.04.2015 Views

Tactical Nuclear Weapons and NATO.pdf - Program on Strategic ...

Tactical Nuclear Weapons and NATO.pdf - Program on Strategic ...

Tactical Nuclear Weapons and NATO.pdf - Program on Strategic ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

During the Cold War, U.S. allies such as Japan <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g><br />

South Korea were effectively excluded from any significant<br />

role in U.S. nuclear policy <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> deployment<br />

decisi<strong>on</strong>s that directly affected them. Indeed, Japanese<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Korean governments were often unaware even of<br />

the dispositi<strong>on</strong> of U.S. nuclear weap<strong>on</strong>s within or near<br />

their territory. In <strong>on</strong>e particularly notorious example,<br />

the R<strong>on</strong>ald Reagan administrati<strong>on</strong> authorized U.S.<br />

negotiators <strong>on</strong> the dispositi<strong>on</strong> of U.S. <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> Soviet intermediate<br />

nuclear forces in Europe to propose that the<br />

Uni<strong>on</strong> of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) simply shift<br />

all their threatening SS-20 intermediate range ballistic<br />

missiles (IRBMs) bey<strong>on</strong>d the Urals—right into range<br />

of U.S. allies in Northeast Asia. Only after angry protestati<strong>on</strong>s<br />

at high levels by the Japanese government in<br />

particular did Washingt<strong>on</strong> revise its negotiating positi<strong>on</strong>.<br />

30 In effect, as l<strong>on</strong>g as U.S. nuclear forces were not<br />

openly visible to Asian populati<strong>on</strong>s—an objective that<br />

most Asian allies <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> the United States came to share<br />

during the Cold War—there were few c<strong>on</strong>straints <strong>on</strong><br />

U.S. policy <strong>on</strong> nuclear weap<strong>on</strong>s in Asia.<br />

This set of relati<strong>on</strong>ships differed markedly from<br />

U.S. relati<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong> nuclear weap<strong>on</strong>s policy with its allies<br />

in Europe, where the United States dealt with its highly<br />

advanced <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> developed allies through <str<strong>on</strong>g>NATO</str<strong>on</strong>g>, a multilateral<br />

alliance operating—often cumbersomely—<strong>on</strong><br />

the basis of c<strong>on</strong>sensus. Though the United States was<br />

the primary power in Western Europe, it operated in<br />

a highly c<strong>on</strong>strained c<strong>on</strong>text, <strong>on</strong>e in which U.S. nuclear<br />

weap<strong>on</strong>s policies received significant scrutiny<br />

from its allies. Moreover, European allies were progressively<br />

integrated into <str<strong>on</strong>g>NATO</str<strong>on</strong>g> nuclear planning,<br />

<str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> serious c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> was even given during the<br />

middle of the Cold War to the creati<strong>on</strong> of a Multilateral<br />

Force <str<strong>on</strong>g>and</str<strong>on</strong>g> to deliberate proliferati<strong>on</strong> to <str<strong>on</strong>g>NATO</str<strong>on</strong>g> al-<br />

88

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!