LUC MICHEL’S
GEOPOLITICAL DAILY
La nouvelle doctrine nucléaire des Usa II :
Que dit réellement le
« US Nuclear Posture
Review » ?
Luc Michel
Lundi 5 février 2018 * See (in French)
on LUC MICHEL’S GEOPOLITICAL DAILY/
LA NOUVELLE
DOCTRINE NUCLEAIRE DES USA QUI CIBLE
DIRECTEMENT MOSCOU ET PEKIN
sur
https://www.facebook.com/Pcn.luc.Michel/posts/1198352186965864
* Résumé français :
La nouvelle
Doctrine nucleaire des usa: Que dit
réellement le « US Nuclear Posture
Review » ?
Les États-Unis
veulent développer des armes nucléaires
tactiques "en réponse à Moscou",
selon le Pentagone. Le Département
américain à la Défense vient de
publier, ce vendredi 2 février, un
document baptisé « Posture nucléaire »
(US Nuclear Posture Review) sur la
situation atomique américaine
qui détermine la nouvelle Doctrine
nucléaire des États-Unis de
Trump.
Dans sa nouvelle
Doctrine nucléaire, Washington a annoncé
son intention de se
doter de nouvelles armes nucléaires sous
prétexte de contrer une
escalade nucléaire que risquait de
provoquer la stratégie militaire russe. La
nouvelle Doctrine américaine prévoit l'augmentation des
dépenses militaires pour la
modernisation de l'arsenal et le
développement des éléments de la «triade
nucléaire» américaine
(missiles balistiques, sous-marins
stratégiques et bombardiers). La
nouvelle Doctrine nucléaire de Trump
n'exclut pas le recours à l'arme
atomique dans le cas d'une attaque non
nucléaire contre les
Etats-Unis …
Mais que dit
exactement ce document du Pentagone ?
THE NEW NUCLEAR
DOCTRINE OF THE USA (II): WHAT DOES THE
‘US NUCLEAR POSTURE REVIEW’
REALLY SAY?
LUC MICHEL (ЛЮК
МИШЕЛЬ) & EODE/
Luc MICHEL for
EODE/
Quotidien
géopolitique – Geopolitical Daily/
2018 01 05/
“The Secretary
shall initiate a new Nuclear Posture
Review to ensure that the United
States nuclear deterrent is modern,
robust, flexible, resilient, ready
and appropriately tailored to deter
21st-century threats and
reassure our allies.”
- President Donald
Trump, 2017.
The United States
wants to develop tactical nuclear
weapons "in response to
Moscow," according to the Pentagon. The
US Department of Defense has
released this Friday, Feb. 2, a document
called "Nuclear Posture Review" on
the US atomic situation that determines
the new US Nuclear Doctrine of
Trump administration.
In its new Nuclear
Doctrine, Washington announced its
intention to acquire new nuclear
weapons on the pretext of “countering a
nuclear escalation that
might provoke Russian military
strategy.” The new American Doctrine
provides for increased military spending
for the modernization of
the arsenal and the development of
elements of the American "nuclear
triad" (ballistic missiles, strategic
submarines and bombers). Trump's
new Nuclear Doctrine does not exclude
the use of nuclear weapons in
the case of a non-nuclear attack on the
United States ...
But what exactly
does this Pentagon document say?
# “NUCLEAR POSTURE
REVIEW”
(FEBRUARY 2018,
OFFICE OF THE US SECRETARY OF DEFENSE)
Excerpt 1:
INTRODUCTION TO
U.S. NUCLEAR POLICY AND STRATEGY
“On January 27,
2017, President Donald Trump directed
Secretary of Defense James
Mattis to initiate a new Nuclear Posture
Review (NPR).
The President made
clear that his first priority is to
protect the United States,
allies and partners. He emphasized both
the long-term goal of eliminating
nuclear weapons and the requirement that
the United States have
modern, flexible, and resilient nuclear capabilities that
are safe, secure, and effective until
such a time as nuclear weapons can
prudently be eliminated from the world.
The United States
remains committed to its efforts in
support of the ultimate global
elimination of nuclear, biological, and
chemical weapons. It has
negotiated multiple arms control
treaties and has fully abided by its
treaty commitments. In addition, for
over two decades the United
States has deployed no new nuclear
capabilities, advanced nuclear
reduction and non-proliferation
initiatives to Russia and others, and
strengthened alliance commitments and
capabilities to safeguard
international order and prevent further
proliferation of nuclear weapons.
Nevertheless,
global threat conditions have worsened
markedly since the most recent,
2010 NPR. There now exist an
unprecedented range and mix of threats,
including major conventional, chemical,
biological, nuclear, space, and
cyber threats, and violent non-state
actors.
International
relations are volatile. Russia and China
are contesting the international
norms and order we have worked with our
allies, partners, and
members of the international community
to build and sustain. Some
regions are marked by persistent
disorder that appears likely to continue
and possibly intensify. These
developments have produced increased
uncertainty and risk, demanding a
renewed seriousness of
purpose in deterring threats and
assuring allies and partners.
While the United
States has continued to reduce the
number and salience of nuclear
weapons, others, including Russia and
China, have moved in the
opposite direction. Russia has expanded
and improved its strategic and
non-strategic nuclear forces. China’s
military modernization has
resulted in an expanded nuclear force,
with little to no transparency
into its intentions. North Korea
continues its illicit pursuit of
nuclear weapons and missile capabilities
in direct violation of United
Nations (U.N.) Security Council
resolutions.
Russia and North
Korea have increased the salience of
nuclear forces in their strategies
and plans and have engaged in
increasingly explicit nuclear
threats. Along with China, they have
also engaged in increasingly
aggressive behavior in outer space and
cyber space.
As a result, the
2018 NPR assesses recent nuclear
policies and requirements that
were established amid a more benign
nuclear environment and
more amicable Great Power relations. It
focuses on identifying the
nuclear policies, strategy, and
corresponding capabilities needed
to protect America, its allies, and
partners in a deteriorating
threat environment. It is strategy
driven and provides guidance for the
nuclear force structure and policy
requirements needed now and in
the future to maintain peace and
stability in a rapidly shifting
environment with significant future
uncertainty.
The current threat
environment and future uncertainties now necessitate a
national commitment to maintain modern
and effective nuclear forces, as
well as the infrastructure needed to
support them.
Consequently, the
United States has initiated a series of
programs to sustain and replace
existing nuclear capabilities before
they reach the end of their
service lives. These programs are
critical to preserving our
ability to deter threats to the Nation.”
Excerpt 2:
GEN. JIM MATTIS
SECRETARY’S PREFACE
“On January 27,
2017, the President directed the
Department of Defense to conduct a new
Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) to ensure a
safe, secure, and
effective nuclear deterrent that
protects the homeland, assures allies and
above all, deters adversaries. This
review comes at a critical moment
in our nation’s history, for America
confronts an international
security situation that is more complex
and demanding than any since the
end of the Cold War. In this
environment, it is not possible to delay
modernization of our nuclear forces if
we are to preserve a credible
nuclear deterrent—ensuring that our
diplomats continue to speak
from a position of strength on matters
of war and peace.
For decades, the
United States led the world in efforts
to reduce the role and number of
nuclear weapons. The 1991 Strategic Arms
Reduction Treaty (START) set
a ceiling of 6,000 accountable strategic
nuclear warheads – a deep
reduction from Cold War highs.
Shorter-range nuclear weapons were almost
entirely eliminated from America’s
nuclear arsenal in the early 1990s.
The 2002 Strategic Offensive Reduction
Treaty and the 2010 New START
Treaty further lowered strategic nuclear
force levels to 1,550
accountable warheads. During this time,
the U.S. nuclear weapons
stockpile drew down by more than 85
percent from its Cold War high. Many
hoped conditions had been set for even
deeper reductions in
global nuclear arsenals, and,
ultimately, for their elimination.
While Russia
initially followed America’s lead and
made similarly sharp reductions in
its strategic nuclear forces, it
retained large numbers of
non-strategic nuclear weapons. Today,
Russia is modernizing these weapons as
well as its other strategic systems.
Even more troubling has been
Russia’s adoption of military strategies
and capabilities that
rely on nuclear escalation for their
success. These developments,
coupled with Russia’s seizure of Crimea
and nuclear threats against our
allies, mark Moscow’s decided return to
Great Power competition.
China, too, is
modernizing and expanding its already
considerable nuclear forces.
Like Russia, China is pursuing entirely
new nuclear capabilities
tailored to achieve particular national
security objectives while
also modernizing its conventional
military, challenging
traditional U.S. military superiority in
the Western Pacific.
Elsewhere, the
strategic picture brings similar
concerns. North Korea’s nuclear
provocations threaten regional and
global peace, despite universal
condemnation in the United Nations.
Iran’s nuclear ambitions remain an
unresolved concern. Globally, nuclear
terrorism remains a real
danger.
We must look
reality in the eye and see the world as
it is, not as we wish it to be. This
NPR reflects the current, pragmatic
assessment of the threats we face
and the uncertainties regarding the
future security
environment. Given the range of
potential adversaries, their
capabilities and strategic
objectives, this review calls for a
flexible, tailored nuclear deterrent
strategy. This review calls for the
diverse set of nuclear
capabilities that provides an American
President flexibility to tailor the
approach to deterring one or more
potential adversaries in different
circumstances.
For any President,
the use of nuclear weapons is
contemplated only in the most extreme
circumstances to protect our vital
interests and those of our
allies. Nuclear forces,
along with our conventional forces and
other instruments of
national power, are therefore first and
foremost directed towards
deterring aggression and preserving
peace. Our goal is to convince
adversaries they have nothing to gain
and everything to lose from the use
of nuclear weapons.
In no way does this
approach lower the nuclear threshold.
Rather, by convincing
adversaries that even limited use of
nuclear weapons will be more costly than
they can tolerate, it in fact raises
that threshold.
To this end, this
review confirms the findings of previous
NPRs that the nuclear
triad—supported by North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) dual-capable
aircraft and a robust nuclear command,
control, and communications
system—is the most cost-effective and
strategically sound means of
ensuring nuclear deterrence. The triad
provides the President
flexibility while guarding against
technological surprise or sudden changes in
the geopolitical environment. To remain
effective, however, we must
recapitalize our Cold War legacy nuclear
forces.
By the time we
complete the necessary modernization of
these forces, they will have
served decades beyond their initial life
expectancy. This review affirms
the modernization programs initiated
during the previous
Administration to replace our nuclear
ballistic missile submarines,
strategic bombers, nuclear air-launched
cruise missiles, ICBMs, and
associated nuclear command and control.
Modernizing our dual-capable
fighter bombers with next-generation
F-35 fighter aircraft will
maintain the strength of NATO’s
deterrence posture and maintain our
ability to forward deploy nuclear
weapons, should the security situation
demand it.
Recapitalizing the
nuclear weapons complex of laboratories
and plants is also long past
due; it is vital we ensure the
capability to design, produce, assess,
and maintain these weapons for as long
as they are required. Due to
consistent underfunding, significant and
sustained investments will be
required over the coming decade to
ensure that National Nuclear
Security Administration will be able to
deliver the nuclear weapons at
the needed rate to support the nuclear
deterrent into the 2030s and
beyond.
Maintaining an
effective nuclear deterrent is much less
expensive than fighting a war that
we were unable to deter. Maintenance
costs for today’s nuclear
deterrent are approximately three
percent of the annual defense
budget. Additional funding of another
three to four percent, over more
than a decade, will be required to
replace these aging systems. This
is a top priority of the Department of
Defense. We are mindful of the
sustained financial commitment and
gratefully recognize the
ongoing support of the American people
and the United States Congress for
this important mission. While we will be
relentless in ensuring our nuclear
capabilities are effective, the
United States is not turning away from
its long-held arms control,
non-proliferation, and nuclear security
objectives. Our commitment to the
goals of the Treaty on the
Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons
(NPT) remains strong. Yet we must
recognize that the current environment
makes further progress toward nuclear
arms reductions in the
near term extremely challenging.
Ensuring our nuclear deterrent
remains strong will provide the best
opportunity for convincing other
nuclear powers to engage in meaningful
arms control initiatives.
This review rests
on a bedrock truth: nuclear weapons have
and will continue to play a
critical role in deterring nuclear
attack and in preventing
large-scale conventional warfare between
nuclear-armed states for the
foreseeable future. U.S. nuclear weapons
not only defend our allies
against conventional and nuclear
threats, they also help them avoid the
need to develop their own nuclear
arsenals. This, in turn, furthers
global security. I would be remiss
if I did not acknowledge the vital role
our Soldiers, Sailors,
Airmen, Marines, Coast Guardsmen, and
civilians play in maintaining
a safe, secure, and ready nuclear force.
Without their ceaseless and
often unheralded efforts, America would
not possess a nuclear
deterrent. At the end of the day,
deterrence comes down to the men and
women in uniform – in silos, in the air,
and beneath the sea.”
Excerpt 3:
THE STRATEGIC
NUCLEAR TRIAD: PRESENT AND FUTURE.
“Today’s strategic
nuclear triad, largely deployed in the
1980s or earlier, consists
of: submarines (SSBNs) armed with
submarine-launched ballistic missiles
(SLBM); land-based intercontinental
ballistic missiles (ICBM);
and strategic bombers carrying gravity
bombs and air-launched cruise
missiles (ALCMs). The triad and
non-strategic nuclear forces,
with supporting NC3, provides diversity
and flexibility as
needed to tailor U.S. strategies for
deterrence, assurance,
achieving objectives should deterrence
fail, and hedging. The increasing need
for this diversity and flexibility, in
turn, is one of the primary
reasons why sustaining and replacing the
nuclear triad and
non-strategic nuclear capabilities, and
modernizing NC3, is necessary now. The
triad’s synergy and overlapping
attributes help ensure the enduring
survivability of our deterrence
capabilities against attack and
our capacity to hold at risk a range of
adversary targets throughout
a crisis or conflict. Eliminating any
leg of the triad would greatly
ease adversary attack planning and allow
an adversary to
concentrate resources and attention on
defeating the remaining two legs.
Therefore, we will sustain our legacy
triad systems until the
planned replacement programs are
deployed.
The United States operates 14 OHIO-class SSBNs
and will continue to take
the steps needed to ensure that OHIO
SSBNs remain operationally
effective and survivable until replaced
by the COLUMBIA-class
SSBN. The COLUMBIA program will deliver
a minimum of 12 SSBNs to replace
the current OHIO fleet and is designed
to provide required deterrence
capabilities for decades.
The ICBM force
consists of 400 single-warhead Minuteman
III missiles deployed in
underground silos and dispersed across
several states. The United States has
initiated the Ground-Based Strategic
Deterrent (GBSD) program to
begin the replacement of Minuteman III
in 2029. The GBSD program will
also modernize the 450 ICBM launch
facilities that will support the
fielding of 400 ICBMs.
The bomber leg of
the triad consists of 46 nuclear-capable
B-52H and 20 nuclear-capable
B-2A “stealth” strategic bombers. The
United States has initiated a
program to develop and deploy the
next-generation bomber, the B-21
Raider. It will first supplement, and
eventually replace elements of
the conventional and nuclear-capable
bomber force beginning in the
mid-2020s.
The B83-1 and
B61-11 gravity bombs can hold at risk a
variety of protected targets.
As a result, both will be retained in
the stockpile, at least
until there is sufficient confidence in
the B61-12 gravity bomb that
will be available in 2020.
Beginning in 1982,
B-52H bombers were equipped with ALCMs.
Armed with ALCMs, the B-52H
can stay outside adversary air defenses
and remain effective. The
ALCM, however, is now more than 25 years
past its design life and
faces continuously improving adversary
air defense systems. The
Long-Range Stand-Off (LRSO) cruise
missile replacement program will
maintain into the future the bomber
force capability to deliver stand-off
weapons that can penetrate and survive
advanced integrated air
defense systems, thus supporting the
long-term effectiveness of
the bomber leg.
The current
non-strategic nuclear force consists
exclusively of a relatively small
number of B61 gravity bombs carried by
F-15E and allied dual capable
aircraft (DCA). The United States is
incorporating nuclear capability
onto the forward-deployable,
nuclear-capable F-35 as a replacement
for the current aging DCA. In
conjunction with the ongoing life
extension program for the B61 bomb, it
will be a key contributor to
continued regional deterrence stability
and the assurance of
allies.”
(Source: Office Of
The US Secretary Of Defense - EODE
Think-Tank)
LUC MICHEL (ЛЮК
МИШЕЛЬ) & EODE
* With the
Geopolitician of the Eurasia-Africa
Axis: Geopolitics -
Geoeconomics - Geoidology - Neoeurasism -
Neopanafricanism (Seen from Moscow and
Malabo):
SPECIAL PAGE Luc
MICHEL’s Geopolitical Daily
https://www.facebook.com/LucMICHELgeopoliticalDaily/
* Luc MICHEL (Люк
МИШЕЛЬ) :
WEBSITE
http://www.lucmichel.net/
PAGE OFFICIELLE III
– GEOPOLITIQUE
https://www.facebook.com/Pcn.luc.Michel.3.Geopolitique/
TWITTER
https://twitter.com/LucMichelPCN
* EODE :
EODE-TV
https://vimeo.com/eodetv
WEBSITE
http://www.eode.org/
Le sommaire de Luc Michel
Le
dossier Monde
Les dernières mises à jour
|