The Future of NuclearWeapons in NATO
Dr. Ian Anthony
N
UCLEAR WEAPON REPORT
2
4 February 2008
*
Dr. Ian Anthony is Research Coordinator at the StockholmInternational Peace Research Institute, SIPRI
The author would like to acknowledge the contribution of a former SIPRIintern, Johnny Janssen, who played an invaluable role in helping to collectinformation for this report. The comments of participants at the meetingorganized by the Friedrich Ebert Stiftung on
The Future Role of Nuclear Weapons in NATO
in Berlin on 12 November were also invaluable in thepreparation of the report.
Imprint Orders
Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung Stockholm Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung StockholmDr. Uwe Optenhögel Valerie ScheibBox 3107 Box 310710362 Stockholm 10362 Stockholm
uwe.optenhogel@fesnord.se
valerie.scheib@fesnord.se
N
UCLEAR WEAPON REPORT
3
Executive Summary
The year 2009 will present an interesting opportunity to evaluate the role of nuclear weapons in European security and to consider possible alternativeapproaches to current policies. NATO may well embark on a process to updatethe Strategic Concept that has been described as a core mission statement forthe Alliance. The current document, dating from 1999, lays out the mainparameters of NATO nuclear policy today. NATO is currently undertaking aninternal review of nuclear deterrence requirements for the twenty-first century.The role of nuclear forces and force postures is being evaluated at the nationallevel almost simultaneously in several key NATO countries in parallel with anew interest in probing the prospects and options for nuclear arms control andfurther arms reductions. The new Administration in the United States iscurrently carrying out a national review of nuclear policy.Officials from the United States and Russia are working to prepare the groundfor a new round of bilateral nuclear arms control, something that PresidentBarack Obama called for during his election campaign. In 2010 almost 200countries will come together to review the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty(NPT), regarded as the centerpiece of international efforts to prevent thespread of nuclear weapons to new countries. However, most countries thatparticipate in the 2010 meeting will expect a balanced approach from nuclearweapon states that takes into consideration the need for further steps towardsnuclear disarmament and towards a new international framework for theequitable sharing of nuclear technology for peaceful uses.Based on public documents and extensive interviews with responsible officialsthere is no reason to think NATO will move away from being a nuclearalliance. NATO allies continue to see a role for nuclear weapons as one part of a mix of capabilities that are needed to guarantee their security in an uncertainand fragmented international environment. However, if no near term change isanticipated from a broad perspective, it might be time to adjust importantaspects of NATO nuclear policy.Can and should nuclear deterrence be tailored to a more discrete and narrowerset of circumstances than was the historically the case? Through such astrategy nuclear weapons would no longer be central to deterring anyaggression against the Alliance. They would remain as one element in anoverall mix of capabilities available to NATO, but in practice their role wouldbe limited to deterring nuclear attacks. The underlying approach on whichtailored deterrence is based has not been widely explained or discussed inEurope and neither its feasibility nor its desirability has been debated.Decisions will also be needed on the future of short range delivery systems fornuclear weapons, including US weapons based in Europe. Although there isno imminent need for a decision on this question, it is the right time for an
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
Notes
Load more
