The US must be prepared to expand nuclear weapons power; officials in the outgoing Biden administration say, a decision President-elect Donald Trump will be asked to make. The US must be prepared to expand its nuclear force to fend off growing threats from China, Russia and North Korea, senior Biden officials say.
Decisions on whether to develop more nuclear weapons are left to the incoming Trump administration, which has yet to spell out its defense plans. During his first term, Mr Donald Trump approved all major nuclear weapons programs inherited from the Obama administration and added two new nuclear systems.
The Biden administration’s policy is codified in the Nuclear Weapons Employment Planning Guidance and is seeing the light of day as China moves toward a major nuclear build-up, Russia abstains from arms control talks and North Korea is increasing its nuclear arsenal.
This highly classified directive, which was signed by President Biden earlier this year, instructs the Pentagon to develop options to simultaneously deter aggression from China, Russia and North Korea. These nations cooperating on military matters increase the risk that Washington may have to deal with multiple conflicts at once.
Biden’s policy, administration officials say, emphasizes the importance of developing advanced non-nuclear systems and deepening military cooperation with allies in Asia and Europe to counter potential threats. The Pentagon, however, is also considering options to deploy more nuclear warheads if those efforts prove insufficient, given the potential for arms control setbacks and further delays in fielding the next generation of US nuclear systems.
“If current trends continue in the negative direction with Russia saying ‘no’ to arms control, China expanding and North Korea building, there may be a need to increase the number of US nuclear weapons being deployed in the future ,” said a senior Biden administration official.
A declassified report on nuclear guidance to be sent to Congress on Friday does not describe specific options under consideration, but notes that “it may be necessary to adjust the current capability, posture, composition or size of the nuclear force of US” to counter “multiple adversaries that are making nuclear weapons more central to their national security strategies.
Trump will have some ready-made options to add to all three strands of what is known as “nuclear triad” of the USA, i.e. land, sea and air based nuclear missiles. Those potential steps include adding more warheads to land-based Minuteman III missiles, deploying more nuclear weapons on ballistic missile-equipped submarines and continuing to develop a nuclear-armed cruise missile submarine, a program the Biden administration initially canceled but Congress restored.
The Trump administration “will inherit some tough tasks and choices,” said Vipin Narang, who served as the Defense Department’s top nuclear official until August. “So they can pick up the ball and keep running with it.” These options parallel many of the recommendations of the Strategic Posture Commission, a congressionally appointed committee of former officials and experts charged with examining security threats from 2027 to 2035.
Some arms control experts, however, argue that the emphasis on developing US nuclear capabilities is misplaced. “Investing in conventional capabilities appears to be a much more effective way to deal with adversaries than spending on more nuclear weapons,” said Hans Christensen of the Federation of American Scientists, a non-profit organization concerned with security issues. “We can use conventional weapons and we have a nuclear arsenal that is built to deal with a wide range of different scenarios.”
The current US nuclear modernization program was conceived when Washington was actively seeking to negotiate new nuclear limits with Russia, China had not yet begun a major nuclear expansion, and North Korea’s nuclear program was less advanced. Now nuclear planning is taking place as the arms control agreements that regulated nuclear competition are beginning to lose their meaning.
For decades, a basic assumption was that the nuclear weapons of the US and Russia could be gradually reduced through mutual agreements. However, the New Start treaty, which was signed in 2010; and limits the US and Russia to 1,550 strategic weapons, is due to expire in February 2026, and there are currently no talks on a follow-up deal between Washington and Moscow.
The threats from Russia, China, North Korea
While Russia has suspended its participation in the agreement, still adheres to agreement limits for warheads, the State Department said in a January report. That would give Trump an opportunity to try to work out a new arms control deal with Moscow that would ease some of the pressure to add to the nuclear arsenal, at least in the short term.
A bigger challenge, however, comes from China, which rebuffed efforts during Trump’s first term and during the Biden administration to engage in nuclear talks. A sign that Beijing may be ready to take small steps to reduce nuclear risks came in September when gave advance notice of a ballistic missile test long range that he carried out over the Pacific.
China, which is estimated to had about 200 operational nuclear warheads in 2018; it is projected to have more than 1,000 warheads by 2030, most of which will be deployed in systems capable of reaching the US, according to a recent Defense Intelligence Agency report. As China’s power grows, the US for the first time they will need to deter two nuclear counterparts.
The Biden administration has taken some steps to upgrade, but not expand, its nuclear force, announcing that it will pursue a new and more powerful variant of the B-61 gravity bomb. He also took steps to extend the life of the “Ohio-class” submarines to compensate for delays in fielding its Columbia-class successor.
“We focused on a ‘better’ approach, not necessarily a ‘stronger’ approach,” Pranay Vaddi, the top nuclear official on the National Security Council, said in a June appearance before the Arms Control Association, a Washington-based group. which supports limits on nuclear weapons. “But let me be clear. Absent a change in the trajectory of adversary arsenals, we may reach a point in the coming years where an increase from the current numbers deployed is required. And we must be fully prepared to execute if the president makes that decision.”
