12.07.2015 Views

global_zero_commission_on_nuclear_risk_reduction_report

global_zero_commission_on_nuclear_risk_reduction_report

global_zero_commission_on_nuclear_risk_reduction_report

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.

GLOBAL ZERO COMMISSION ON NUCLEAR RISK REDUCTION REPORTDE-ALERTING AND STABILIZING THE WORLD’S NUCLEAR FORCE POSTURESstave off future <strong>risk</strong>s. A politically or legally binding agreementam<strong>on</strong>g all the <strong>nuclear</strong> weap<strong>on</strong>s countries would helpinsulate the <strong>nuclear</strong> chains of command from human andtechnical dysfuncti<strong>on</strong>s that could otherwise cause the useof <strong>nuclear</strong> weap<strong>on</strong>s and even trigger a <strong>nuclear</strong> exchange. Itwould offer protecti<strong>on</strong> from computer error, cyber seizureof <strong>nuclear</strong> command and c<strong>on</strong>trol, accidental det<strong>on</strong>ati<strong>on</strong>s,unauthorized “insider” launch, false warning of enemy missileattack, and rushed <strong>nuclear</strong> decisi<strong>on</strong>-making.The de-alerting measures outlined and recommended inthis <strong>report</strong> are admittedly near-term “stop-gap” steps. Asexplained earlier, a truly optimal de-alerting regime wouldrequire a more fundamental makeover of the U.S. and Russian<strong>nuclear</strong> force and command structures. They were builtduring the Cold War to maximize attack readiness and rapidforce executi<strong>on</strong> – positive attributes at the time but liabilitiestoday. These postures resist quick fixes to stand them down.For example, the land-based strategic missiles must c<strong>on</strong>tinuouslyoperate their guidance gyroscopes in peacetimeto remain reliable. If they are powered down and taken offalert, they could not be restarted reliably. The guidance systemsbecome pr<strong>on</strong>e to malfuncti<strong>on</strong> during such a re-boot.Both countries need to go back to the drawing boards tore-c<strong>on</strong>figure their <strong>nuclear</strong> forces and command systems tomake them “de-alerting friendly.” For the United States, thisprobably means that its silo-based missiles should be eliminatedentirely. Modernizati<strong>on</strong> plans also need to build infeatures that make the job of de-alerting easier. Meanwhile,this <strong>report</strong> proposes a set of practical if not optimal ad hocremedies.IV. STILL AN ANARCHIC INTERNATIONAL SYSTEMIn the post-Cold War era it seems almost unimaginable thatstates could become embroiled in c<strong>on</strong>fr<strong>on</strong>tati<strong>on</strong>s that escalateto the level of <strong>nuclear</strong> brinksmanship or worse. Thegrowing interc<strong>on</strong>nectedness and interdependencies am<strong>on</strong>gnati<strong>on</strong>s in the 21st century have made major c<strong>on</strong>venti<strong>on</strong>alwar extremely costly and <strong>nuclear</strong> war unthinkable. Thesethickening sinews of internati<strong>on</strong>al stability include instantaneousworldwide communicati<strong>on</strong>s and informati<strong>on</strong> transfer,rapidly growing trade, massive flows of people and corporati<strong>on</strong>sacross nati<strong>on</strong>al boundaries, and the dramatic riseof direct foreign investment and <str<strong>on</strong>g>global</str<strong>on</strong>g> debt underwriting.Ec<strong>on</strong>omic clout increasingly overshadows military might asthe currency of power. And an expanding c<strong>on</strong>stellati<strong>on</strong> ofelectoral democracies (tripling in number since the 1970sand growing from 70 to 125 during the past 25 years) 8 hasemerged. History shows that democracies do not wage warwith each other. Despite counter-<str<strong>on</strong>g>global</str<strong>on</strong>g>izati<strong>on</strong> trends insome isolated cases – notably, the partial re-nati<strong>on</strong>alizati<strong>on</strong>and de-<str<strong>on</strong>g>global</str<strong>on</strong>g>izati<strong>on</strong> in evidence in Russian state capitalismand in its societal introversi<strong>on</strong>, and the pre-<str<strong>on</strong>g>global</str<strong>on</strong>g>izati<strong>on</strong>stasis of the North Korean hermit kingdom – as well as theebbing of democracy in a dozen key nati<strong>on</strong>s, the tide of historyis heading inexorably toward greater integrati<strong>on</strong> of the195 sovereign nati<strong>on</strong>s in the world. And this tide is ineluctablyeroding the role of the threat of <strong>nuclear</strong> weap<strong>on</strong>s use oractual use in arbitrating the outcome of inter-state c<strong>on</strong>flict.Further marginalizing this waning role are the elusivethreats to internati<strong>on</strong>al security emerging from the samedynamics of <str<strong>on</strong>g>global</str<strong>on</strong>g>izati<strong>on</strong>. Globalizati<strong>on</strong> allows increasinglylethal technologies to propagate around the world – spreadingeven to insular states like North Korea (recipient of <strong>nuclear</strong>technology transfers), failing states like Libya (recipientof <strong>nuclear</strong> transfers before imploding during the ArabSpring) and sub-state groups like Hamas (recipient of technologiesfor building rockets with sufficient range to assaultTel Aviv). The world is bracing for even worse: the inevitableacquisiti<strong>on</strong> of truly deadly biological pathogens or <strong>nuclear</strong>weap<strong>on</strong>s by n<strong>on</strong>-state actors, enabling even small groups ofindividuals to cause mass casualties.The world’s <strong>nuclear</strong> stockpile offers scant defense against thespread and use of virulent weap<strong>on</strong>s by imploding states andfanatical terrorists. It also offers scant political or militaryleverage over <strong>nuclear</strong> proliferati<strong>on</strong>, cyber warfare threats, or<strong>nuclear</strong>, chemical, and biological terrorism. In many respectsthe world’s 16,000 <strong>nuclear</strong> weap<strong>on</strong>s create the problem, notthe soluti<strong>on</strong> to these <str<strong>on</strong>g>global</str<strong>on</strong>g> ills. They do not solve the problemof loose nukes falling into the hands of terrorists, for8 Freedom in the World 2015, Freedom House, 2015, https://freedomhouse.org/sites/default/files/01152015_FIW_2015_final.pdf,p.6.15

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!