Experts in nuclear deterrence and missile defense have issued a warning that the United States can no longer rely on Cold War-era strategies to combat the escalating threats posed by Russia and China. They argue that maintaining nuclear superiority is essential to prevent the potentially catastrophic consequences of a nuclear war.
On Tuesday, the Washington-based think tank Heritage Foundation released a special assessment report titled “Assessment of Nuclear Posture for the Next Administration: Building a 21st Century Nuclear Arsenal”. In the report, Robert Peters, a U.S. defense expert and former Chief Strategist of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA), stated, “Reliable nuclear deterrence is not cheap, but it is much cheaper than engaging in a nuclear war.”
“A world where the United States is at a nuclear disadvantage while autocratic regimes enjoy nuclear superiority is more likely to lead to a nuclear war,” he wrote.
Peters recommended that the U.S. establish a necessary nuclear arsenal to ensure the prevention of strategic attacks and wars between major powers in the next half-century.
He suggested that the U.S. abandon its long-standing global nuclear disarmament policy and “expand and diversify” its strategic nuclear arsenal while significantly expanding its non-strategic nuclear arsenal.
According to the report, both China and Russia are increasingly relying on nuclear weapons to intimidate neighboring countries in order to weaken U.S. leadership.
“These dictators are increasingly reliant on nuclear weapons,” Peters said. “Beijing and Moscow are expanding their nuclear arsenals, seeking to achieve at least parity with the U.S. and potentially gain an advantage. This is why Beijing and Moscow have rejected or abandoned all nuclear arms control or risk reduction measures in recent years.”
The nuclear expert suggested that the U.S. should establish a larger fleet of ballistic missile submarines and increase the warheads of its land-based strategic deterrence forces.
Peters also stated that Washington should immediately withdraw non-strategic nuclear warheads from its reserve stockpile to enhance its “existing battlefield capabilities”.
According to the Arms Control Association, the U.S. has over 1300 retired warheads removed from active inventory but not dismantled, while Russia has 1200 such warheads.
Peters noted that these immediate steps are interim measures until the nuclear industry can mass-produce plutonium pit nuclear warheads.
He proposed that by 2030, production should increase by 80 warheads per year, reaching 200 warheads per year by 2035 to meet the demands of the new generation’s military needs.
The report also encouraged the modernization of U.S. military forces, recommending the deployment of more U.S. nuclear weapons across Europe and into the Western Pacific.
Since Russia’s withdrawal from the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty in February 2023, concerns about nuclear security have been escalating.
The U.S. has consistently called for China to participate in nuclear arms control negotiations, but Beijing has repeatedly refused.
The U.S. and Russia still possess 90% of the global nuclear arsenal, with the U.S. having 5044 warheads and Russia having 5580.
China’s unrestrained nuclear expansion has been a cause for concern for many years. While China is currently believed to possess around 500 nuclear warheads, Peters still views China as the “primary strategic challenge to the United States”.
He warned that despite China’s stated principle of “no first use” of nuclear weapons, recent statements from Chinese political and military leaders and changes in their nuclear posture suggest that China is attempting to redefine what constitutes “first use”.
“In this scenario, even though China has a public policy of no first use, they could still potentially use nuclear weapons first during a conflict,” Peters said.
Peters also expressed concerns over whether China possesses illegal bio-weapon capabilities, highlighting the likelihood of China having a dual-use bio-weapon program that could quickly transition into a weapon program.
In addition to the U.S., Russia, and China, North Korea possesses 50 nuclear warheads.
France, the United Kingdom, India, Pakistan, and Israel collectively possess over 12,100 nuclear warheads.
The report acknowledges that nuclear deterrence represents a significant expenditure for U.S. national security, but it is far less costly than engaging in a nuclear war.
“All of this comes at a price. Nuclear weapons currently account for 5% to 6% of the defense budget,” the report indicated, suggesting that the proposed reforms could further increase the defense budget by 1% to 2%.
The report concluded, “Ultimately, the cost of deterring major wars (especially nuclear wars) is far lower than actually fighting a war.”
“The focus should not be on deploying forces capable of winning a nuclear war, but rather on preventing wars and strategic attacks. To achieve this, the U.S. must establish and deploy reliable nuclear arsenals,” Peters stated.