Homepage Feature

Obama’s shift on US nuclear weapons policy

Audio: Play | Download

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Download MP3
The Pentagon released its official policy review on US nuclear weapons policy today. And the Obama administration says it signals a shift away from Cold War-era thinking. The World’s Matthew Bell reports.

• Read the Nuclear Posture Review (pdf)
• Foreign Policy: Nuclear Posture Review (or Nuclear Public Relations?)

Read the Transcript
This text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

MARCO WERMAN:  The Obama administration says it’s moving away from a Cold War era mindset on nuclear weapons.  The Pentagon today released an official declaration on U.S. nuclear policy.  The so-called Nuclear Posture Review was about a year in the making.  And as The World’s Matthew Bell reports, it represents one step in the Obama administration’s effort to realize the President’s states goal of building a future free of nuclear weapons.

MATTHEW BELL:  Part of the challenge was to take President Obama’s speech in Prague last year, in which he talked about getting to nuclear zero, and then to get U.S. officials to agree on a series of actions to realize that vision.  The review says the administration’s goal is to reduce both the number of U.S. nuclear weapons, and U.S. reliance on its nuclear capability.  It says the massive U.S. nuclear arsenal inherited from the Cold War is poorly suited for today’s threats.  Defense Secretary Robert Gates talked about those threats during a news briefing today at the Pentagon.

ROBERT GATES:  The review rightly places the prevention of nuclear terrorism and proliferation at the top of the U.S. nuclear policy agenda.  Given Al Qaeda’s continued quest for nuclear weapons, Iran’s ongoing nuclear efforts, and North Korea’s proliferation, this focus is appropriate an indeed essential, an essential change from previous reviews.

BELL: There had been a lot of speculation about how the Obama strategy would characterize the role of the U.S. nuclear arsenal.  Would the administration renounce first use of nuclear weapons?  Would the review state that the sole purpose of U.S. nuclear weapons is to deter a nuclear attack on the United States or its allies?  Gates said there was a lot of discussion about these questions inside the government and he said consensus was achieved by describing the “fundamental purpose: of the U.S. nuclear arsenal as one of deterrence.

GATES: We didn’t think we were far enough along the road toward getting control of nuclear weapons around the world to limit ourselves so explicitly and so I think there was general agreement that the term fundamental purpose basically made clear, and other language makes clear, this is obviously a weapon of last resort.

BELL: In a glaring departure from the previous administration, this Nuclear Posture Review, or NPR, says the U.S. will not use nuclear weapons to attack a hostile, non-nuclear state that is also in compliance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.  That formulation carves out exceptions for terrorist groups and for countries such as Iran and North Korea.  Again, Secretary Gates.

GATES: If there is a message for Iran and North Korea here, it is that if you’re going to play by the rules, if you’re going to join the international community, then we will undertake certain obligations to you.  And that’s covered in the NPR.  But if you’re not going to play by the rules, if you’re going to be a proliferator, then all options are on the table in terms of how we deal with you.

BELL: This justification for maintaining the U.S. nuclear arsenal is a profound disappointment for advocates of a more aggressive move toward disarmament.  Jonathan Schell is an expert at Yale University on nuclear issues.  Schell says President Obama isn’t moving fast enough or far enough away from Cold War era thinking.

JONATHAN SCHELL:  His vision is extremely positive and the elements are all there.  The problem is the translation of the vision into concrete action.  That’s what we need to see and that’s what we haven’t seen sufficiently so far in my opinion.

BELL: At bare minimum, Schell says the Obama administration’s policy review should have renounced U.S. first use of nuclear weapons and then, it might have also included a commitment to draw down U.S. nuclear defenses deployed decades ago.

SCHELL: The United States has nuclear weapons in Europe which were put there to guard against the Soviet conventional invasion of Europe.  Well there is no, do I have to say it that there is no Soviet Union and the idea that Russia would do any such thing is just beyond absurd.

BELL: But even critics like Schell might be holding out some hope.  Later this week President Obama plans to sign a new arms control treaty with Russia an next week the President will host a nuclear security summit in Washington with several dozen heads of state.  For The World, I’m Matthew Bell.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.