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

<strong>and</strong> nuclear forces in Europe remains vital to the security of Europe,
which is inseparably linked to that of North America.” See
“The Alliance’s Strategic Concept,” April 24, 1999, para. 42, available
from www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/official_texts_27433.htm.
28. “Active Engagement, Modern Defence: Strategic Concept
for the Defence <strong>and</strong> Security of the Members of the North Atlantic
Treaty Organisation,” adopted by the Heads of State <strong>and</strong> Government
in Lisbon, Portugal, November 19, 2010, available from
www.nato.int/lisbon2010/strategic-concept-2010-eng.<strong>pdf</strong>.
29. Amy Woolf, “Non-strategic <strong>Nuclear</strong> <strong>Weapons</strong>,” CRS Report
for Congress No. RL32572, Washington, DC: Congressional
Research Service, February 2011, p. 14 ; also see James J. Wirtz
<strong>and</strong> Jeffrey A. Larsen, eds., <strong>Nuclear</strong> Transformation: The New U.S.
<strong>Nuclear</strong> Doctrine, New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. The New
Triad has three legs: offensive military strike options, which included
all three legs of the original Triad, but could also include
non-nuclear strike systems; strategic defenses; <strong>and</strong> a responsive
defense infrastructure.
30. See 2010 NPR, pp. 38-39.
31. While reducing the ambiguity in the U.S. negative security
assurance offered to other nations, the Obama administration’s
2010 NPR does state, however, that “in the case of countries not
covered by this [negative security] assurance—states that possess
nuclear weapons <strong>and</strong> states not in compliance with their nuclear
non-proliferation obligations—there remains a narrow range of
contingencies in which U.S. nuclear weapons may still play a role
in deterring conventional or CBW [chemical <strong>and</strong> biological warfare]
attack against the United States or its allies <strong>and</strong> partners.”
NPR, p. 16.
32. For more on the Bush administration’s approach, see Roger
Speed <strong>and</strong> Michael May, “Assessing the United States’ <strong>Nuclear</strong>
Posture,” Chap. 7, in U.S. <strong>Nuclear</strong> <strong>Weapons</strong> Policy: Confronting Today’s
Threats, George Bunn <strong>and</strong> Christopher F. Chyba, eds., Washington,
DC: Brookings Institution, 2006, pp. 248-296.
33. James N. Gibson, <strong>Nuclear</strong> <strong>Weapons</strong> of the United States: An
Illustrated History, Atglen, PA: Schiffer, 1996; Robert S. Norris <strong>and</strong>
355