The United States must replace and upgrade its nuclear warheads or risk seeing the U.S. nuclear deterrent deteriorate and fail, according to Gen. Kevin Chilton, commander of the strategic command.
“I need reliable delivery programs” such as missiles, Chilton said before the Nuclear Deterrence Summit. But as well, “I need reliable weapons,” he said.
Multiple myths, however, are impeding the move to replace or improve existing warheads with more reliable weapons, he said.
One myth is that if a warhead is safe and reliable today, it will be tomorrow, and that is untrue, as these weapons decay with age, he said. “The hardware is speaking to us,” he said. “We better listen.” None of the warheads is younger than 20 years old, he stressed. “We are overdue” to replace weapons.
“Someday we may need to test” a replacement warhead, he said. The United States never should surrender the right to test weapons, if testing is required, he said.
Another myth is that there is ample time to mull over the problem and make any fixes, he said. This isn’t true, he continued, adding that the United States needs nuclear weapon production facilities. One which produced 50 weapons a year still would require 40 years to replace all U.S. weapons, he observed.
Yet another myth is that replacing nuclear weapons means the new assets will increase nuclear capability, rather than merely replicating it, and he said that is untrue.
“There is no need for a new nuclear capability,” he said.
Then there is a myth that modernizing U.S. nuclear weapons leads to proliferation. Rather, he said, not modernizing emboldens others, encouraging proliferation.
U.S. allies — if they see the American nuclear stockpile aging and becoming unreliable — would rush to go nuclear themselves, rather than to continue relying on the U.S. nuclear umbrella for protection from hostile forces.
In fact, he said, the United States is responsible, having made “dramatic” cuts in the nuclear stockpile from 10,000 bombs to a range of 1,700 to 2,200.
And despite that U.S. move to reduce its nuclear stockpile, that hasn’t discouraged nuclear ambitions of Iran or North Korea, he noted.
Finally, he said there is a myth that modernizing the stockpile conflicts with reducing it, and that is untrue, he said.
A path of inaction, he said, is a path to unilateral disarmament, adding that “the time to act is now.”