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

tribute importantly to the deliberations from which
<strong>NATO</strong> policy is developed
By its very nature, the process of consensus lacks
transparency <strong>and</strong> is frequently impenetrable for those
outside of the formal policy process. This lack of transparency
explains why the decision that emerges often
disappoints the expectations of those who are in favor
of change. The weakness of the process is that the final
decision often represents the lowest common denominator;
its strength is that it represents a position to
which all members will adhere. An additional consideration,
however, is that the need to find compromises
that massage national positions means that the final
language is often open to multiple interpretations.
The language in the new Strategic Concept was hailed
by some as the first instance of <strong>NATO</strong> leaders endorsing
the goal of a world without nuclear weapons; others,
however, pointed to the qualifying words “create
the conditions for” as indicating something rather less
than a full endorsement of the goal. 2
It is also important to note that nuclear affairs are
rarely featured very high on <strong>NATO</strong>’s agenda. Because
of the sensitivity associated with nuclear weapons,
there is frequently a reluctance on the part of officials
to discuss nuclear matters <strong>and</strong> a tendency to leave
these discussions to those who, for reasons of technical,
operational, or policy expertise, are regarded as
experts. These factors <strong>and</strong> the obvious distraction of
other events mean that nuclear issues frequently do
not occupy the position of importance many believe
they should.
In gaining an underst<strong>and</strong>ing of the current debate
on <strong>NATO</strong>’s nuclear policy, there are two further
considerations: the role of the United States <strong>and</strong> the
significance attached to the maintenance of <strong>NATO</strong>
238