BACKGROUNDER

No. 2826 | JULY 11, 2013

Disarm Now, Ask Questions Later: Obama’s Nuclear Weapons Policy
Baker Spring
Abstract

President Barack Obama’s declared goal of eliminating the U.S. nuclear arsenal appears to be driving U.S. nuclear policy. The Nuclear Posture Review Implementation Study, which recommends reducing the number of U.S. strategic nuclear weapons by up to one-third, appears to have resulted from choosing the amount of reduction first and then justifying the number after the fact, rather than assessing U.S. deterrence needs first and then choosing the number of weapons that would meet that need. The Administration’s backward approach to policymaking threatens to undermine the security of the United States and its allies.

Key Points
■■

O

While President Obama was speaking in Berlin on June 19 about taking a step toward total nuclear disarmament, the White House issued a statement on how the President had adopted a policy that would change how the United States might employ nuclear weapons in the midst of a future crisis. President Obama has apparently decided first to reduce the number of weapons in the U.S. arsenal to meet his arms control objectives and then changed the policy to justify the lower number. The result will be a nuclear arsenal that both quantitatively and qualitatively is insufficient to defend U.S. vital interests. The United States needs a nuclear force along with defensive and conventional strike weapons that can protect and defend the American people and U.S. allies. This will require more nuclear weapons and a higherquality nuclear force than what the President says he wants.

n June 19, 2013, the Obama White House released a fact sheet on its updated nuclear weapons policy. The Nuclear Posture Review Implementation Study (NPRIS)1 has been a long time in coming. Not surprisingly, the NPRIS contends that the United States can safely reduce the number of strategic nuclear weapons by up to one-third below the current levels. Further, the NPRIS states that the U.S. may do this unilaterally, but prefers to reduce through a negotiated agreement with Russia. Current levels, which were set by the 2010 New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START), are already controversially low.2 The report provides evidence that President Barack Obama first chose the reduced numbers in the U.S. strategic nuclear arsenal and then used the NPRIS to justify these numbers, instead of assessing U.S. requirements for deterrence first and then choosing

■■

■■

■■

This paper, in its entirety, can be found at http://report.heritage.org/bg2826 Produced by the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC 20002 (202) 546-4400 | heritage.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.

org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress. DC 20002 (202) 546-4400 | heritage. they can.47 trillion of lost national income by 2030. In case anyone thinks the Administration has since backed off from the anti-coal agenda. Without the addition of carbon capture and sequestration. Kreutzer. a prohibitively costly and technologically challenging requirement. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they are going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted. Nicolas D. and Kevin D. can be found at http://report. in its entirety. Bankrupting Coal Hurts American Families.6 Last year.”2 In a speech on June 25.4 the regulation would effectively ban the construction of new coal-fired plants. reliable energy source— the effect of which is to drive up prices for American families and businesses. With 497 billion tons of recoverable coal in the United States—enough to provide electricity for 500 years at current consumption rates3—coal has the potential to be an important resource long into the future. which would adversely affect coalfired plants the most. and his war on coal. It is this war on coal that would prove the most costly. but in his recent speech on climate change.000 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt of electricity generated.org/ib3978 Produced by the Center for Data Analysis The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue. NE Washington. he said that if “someone wants to build a coal-powered plant. with hundreds of thousands of lost jobs and $1. Loris. The President’s recent announcement also threatens existing plants and would adversely affect the more than 1. reduce carbon dioxide emissions from new and existing power plants. President Obama called on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to No. reliable energy. 3978 | JUnE 27. In March 2012. nice-sounding but too expensive efficiency mandates. ineffective policies from his first four years in office: Solyndra-style loan guarantees. These regulations are part of a broader effort from the President to significantly reduce coal as an affordable. the EPA proposed a rule that would prohibit new power plants from emitting more than 1. which is a continuation of the costly. PhD. President Obama vowed to go around Congress to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. 2013 Cost of a Climate Policy: The Economic Impact of Obama’s Climate Action Plan David W. Regulations Pile On. Obama climate advisor Daniel Schrag just this week said that “a war on coal is exactly what’s needed. When Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama pushed his cap-and-trade plan in 2008.heritage. the EPA finalized new mercury and air toxics standards that will force utilities to use maximum achievable control technology standards to reduce mercury emissions and other hazardous air .5 Whether the final rule reflects the proposed rule remains to be seen. Dayaratna This paper.100 coal-fired generators at nearly 600 plant locations that generate 40 percent of America’s affordable.ISSUE BRIEF P resident Obama recently released his Climate Action Plan.”1 Congress rejected his and other cap-and-trade plans. The EPA’s constant attacks on coal threaten to close off access to this dependable energy source. The Heritage Foundation modeled the effects of significantly reducing coalfired plants in America and found devastating economic effects.

authoritarian. can be found at http://report. but the U. He ruled in a secretive. Egypt was headed for a civil war as a result of a surging rebellion against Morsi’s increasingly authoritarian rule. even some of his former supporters. the United States should press the Egyptian military to lay the groundwork for a return to civilian rule as soon as possible. is sitting on a volcano and knows it.S. 2013 James Jay Carafano. in its entirety. and political problems.S. just as it removed Hosni Mubarak in 2011. social. The army. To salvage the increasingly difficult situation in Egypt. When challenged. aid and recalibrate the aid program to focus on fighting terrorism and preventing food shortages—the chief threats to Egypt’s future. and exclusionary manner that derailed Egypt’s democratic experiment and alienated far too many Egyptians. attach tighter strings to U. whose increasingly authoritarian rule was leading Egypt into a civil war. DC 20002 (202) 546-4400 | heritage.heritage. and demonized Key Points ■■ Egypt’s army was justified in ousting President Mohamed Morsi. ■■ ■■ ■■ Morsi’s Threat to Democracy ■■ ■■ This paper.S. the United States should press the Egyptian military to lay the groundwork for a return to civilian rule as soon as possible. however. he focused more on maximizing his own power and that of the Muslim Brotherhood than on addressing Egypt’s worsening economic. PhD. and recalibrate the U. aid program to focus on fighting terrorism and preventing food shortages—the chief threats to Egypt’s future.org/bg2824 Produced by the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue. 2824 | JULY 11. . must recognize that Egypt is much closer to becoming a failed state or economic basket case than it is to becoming a genuine democracy. NE Washington. marginalized. To salvage the increasingly difficult situation in Egypt. The U. President Mohamed Morsi was his own worst enemy. to prevent growing civil disorder from undermining the power of the state and its own privileges within the state. he arrogantly ignored. No amount of aid from Washington can resolve Egypt’s deep economic problems. the military could help to salvage Egypt’s chances of making the difficult transition to a stable democracy.BACKGROUNDER No. aid. can encourage Cairo to undertake free-market economic reforms to rejuvenate its economy. The intervention was widely applauded by opposition political parties and the overwhelming majority of the millions of protesters who demanded that Morsi step down. and James Phillips Egypt: A Way Forward After a Step Back E gypt’s army recently ousted President Mohamed Morsi. During his year in office. Washington should attach tighter strings to U.S.S. By taking steps to preserve public order. Clearly.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.

To this end. can be found at http://report. 2821 | JULY 11. ■■ ne of the elements distinguishing the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) from many of its counterparts is its continued role as a Party army. the PRC’s psychological warfare operations are already underway despite the fact that there is no active conflict. The PLA is. including strategic communications. O ■■ ■■ ■■ This paper. and media outreach capabilities. and deception. Psychological warfare is in some ways the most far-reaching of the “three warfares.” including what is termed the “three warfares”: public opinion warfare. At the moment. This distinction both obligates the PLA to help maintain the CCP’s grip on power and gives it an additional set of tools with which to defend the CCP and the Chinese state. The “three warfares” represent the PRC’s commitment to expanding potential areas of conflict from the purely military (i.org/bg2821 Produced by the Asian Studies Center The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue.” It involves the application of specialized information and media in accordance with a strategic goal and in support of political and military objectives. To avoid being psychologically outmaneuvered by a PRC intent on winning without firing a shot. the PRC released “political work regulations” for the People’s Liberation Army addressing the importance of waging “the three warfares”: public opinion warfare. Key Points ■■ Over the past decade. .S.e. It is therefore essential that the United States counter such psychological operations now while preparing to use its own arsenal of political warfare weapons should a conflict ever arise. DC 20002 (202) 546-4400 | heritage. and psychological warfare. the PLA is not only planning for operations on the physical battlefield. NE Washington. alienation. 2013 Winning Without Fighting: The Chinese Psychological Warfare Challenge Dean Cheng Abstract Beijing hopes to win future conflicts without firing a shot.BACKGROUNDER No. legal warfare. as well as dedicated psychological operations units. it is also preparing to conduct “political warfare. in its entirety. Indeed. involving the direct or indirect use of military forces) to the more political. first and foremost.heritage. and legal warfare. the People’s Republic of China has exhibited growing interest in waging asymmetrical warfare.. Such expansion will be supported by manipulation of an enemy’s leadership. public diplomacy. must strengthen its own psychological warfare capabilities. including through intimidation and coercion. psychological warfare.1 Such efforts are aimed at a variety of potential audiences and usually involve operational missions against an opponent’s psychology and cognitive capacities.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress. the U. How? By using psychological warfare to manipulate both a nation’s leaders and its populace—affecting the thought processes and cognitive frameworks of allies and opponents alike. the armed wing of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

BACKGROUNDER No. When challenged. but the U. PhD. just as it removed Hosni Mubarak in 2011. social. the military could help to salvage Egypt’s chances of making the difficult transition to a stable democracy. NE Washington. aid. The U.org/bg2824 Produced by the Douglas and Sarah Allison Center for Foreign Policy Studies The Heritage Foundation 214 Massachusetts Avenue. Egypt was headed for a civil war as a result of a surging rebellion against Morsi’s increasingly authoritarian rule. Clearly. the United States should press the Egyptian military to lay the groundwork for a return to civilian rule as soon as possible.heritage. in its entirety. and James Phillips Egypt: A Way Forward After a Step Back E gypt’s army recently ousted President Mohamed Morsi. whose increasingly authoritarian rule was leading Egypt into a civil war. President Mohamed Morsi was his own worst enemy. 2013 James Jay Carafano.S. attach tighter strings to U. During his year in office. He ruled in a secretive. authoritarian. can be found at http://report. No amount of aid from Washington can resolve Egypt’s deep economic problems. aid program to focus on fighting terrorism and preventing food shortages—the chief threats to Egypt’s future. DC 20002 (202) 546-4400 | heritage. and recalibrate the U. to prevent growing civil disorder from undermining the power of the state and its own privileges within the state. To salvage the increasingly difficult situation in Egypt. he arrogantly ignored. .S. and exclusionary manner that derailed Egypt’s democratic experiment and alienated far too many Egyptians. aid and recalibrate the aid program to focus on fighting terrorism and preventing food shortages—the chief threats to Egypt’s future. can encourage Cairo to undertake free-market economic reforms to rejuvenate its economy.S. To salvage the increasingly difficult situation in Egypt. marginalized. 2824 | JULY 11. is sitting on a volcano and knows it. the United States should press the Egyptian military to lay the groundwork for a return to civilian rule as soon as possible. even some of his former supporters. The intervention was widely applauded by opposition political parties and the overwhelming majority of the millions of protesters who demanded that Morsi step down. and political problems. however. Washington should attach tighter strings to U.org Nothing written here is to be construed as necessarily reflecting the views of The Heritage Foundation or as an attempt to aid or hinder the passage of any bill before Congress.S.S. By taking steps to preserve public order. must recognize that Egypt is much closer to becoming a failed state or economic basket case than it is to becoming a genuine democracy. he focused more on maximizing his own power and that of the Muslim Brotherhood than on addressing Egypt’s worsening economic. and demonized Key Points ■■ Egypt’s army was justified in ousting President Mohamed Morsi. ■■ ■■ ■■ Morsi’s Threat to Democracy ■■ ■■ This paper. The army.

com/article/SB10001424127887323899704578587131736732940. had been sworn in as interim president.” The Wall Street Journal.BACKGROUNDER | NO. this time the military sought the endorsement of religious leaders. Under these conditions. “Post-Coup Violence Spreads in Egypt. Egypt’s mushrooming political violence will be hard to control. Similar organizations in Libya.”1 Tens of thousands of Morsi supporters poured out of mosques on Friday to protest Morsi’s ouster. Islamist militants in the northern Sinai. Mansour is a little-known but respected low-key technocrat. Matt Bradley. Ansar al-Sharia in Egypt (Supporters of Islamic Law). who had “failed to meet the demands of the people. July 6. leaving at least 36 dead and more than 1. but this appointment was later rescinded under pressure from the Nour Party. and Reem Abdellatif. 2 . Even in the unlikely event that the Muslim Brotherhood reins in its members as part of some deal to allow it to compete in future elections. 2824 JULY 11. but Islamist leaders have vowed not to give up without a fight. Egypt’s army justifiably intervened to restore order in support of the majority of Egyptians who were rebelling against an Islamist authoritarian regime. one of the few Islamist groups that supported the coup. 2013). Egyptian Defense Minister General Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi announced that Morsi. more radical Islamists are sure to push back violently. Speaking at Cairo’s Rabaa Mosque during a demonstration on “Rejection Friday. the supreme leader of the Muslim Brotherhood. Baradei. a hotbed of Islamist extremism. ProMorsi demonstrations were quickly countered by anti-Morsi protests in a highly charged atmosphere that degenerated into widespread clashes. It is expected that President Mansour will soon announce the formation of a new government with a cabinet composed of technocrats and caretakers. 2013. frequently clashed with the United States over the Iran nuclear issue when he led the International Atomic Energy Agency. the provincial capital. chief justice of the Supreme Constitutional Court. During his year in office. a new Islamist group. Mansour pledged to continue the democratic reforms of the 2011 revolution so that “we stop producing tyrants” and said that new elections were “the only way” forward. Unlike Gamal Abdel Nasser’s coup in 1952 or the 2011 coup that brought down Hosni Mubarak.” was relieved of his duties and that the Islamist-written constitution was suspended. and youth activists. “We are all willing to sacrifice our necks and our souls for him. social. Tamer El-Ghobashy. has called for continued protests until Morsi is reinstated as president. announced its formation on an online forum for militants in the Sinai region and proclaimed that it will gather arms and train recruits for a jihad against Egypt’s new government. and Tunisia have served as front groups for attracting recruits to al-Qaeda–like terrorist organizations. Yemen. leftist and liberal parties. On Monday. http:/ / online. a coalition of 1. On July 3. mr. the military authorities announced that Adly Mansour. which he linked to foreign conspiracies. at least 51 of Morsi’s supporters were killed when troops responded to an attack on the Republican Guard headquarters where Morsi was last seen before his ouster. many of whom shared the stage when General el-Sissi announced Morsi’s ouster in a televised statement. and political problems. he could be well suited to steering the writing of a new constitution to replace the Islamist document that Morsi had rammed through in December. The authorities have sought to arrest more than 200 top leaders of the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist organizations on charges of inciting their followers to kill anti-Morsi demonstrators.” Badie warned.wsj. a secular liberal who led the National Salvation Front. political leaders. Mohammed Badie.html (accessed July 8. Morsi has been detained at an undisclosed location. 2013 opposition political parties. launched coordinated attacks against police facilities and an airport at El Arish. The next day. although he gave no indication of when they would be held. As a judge. President Mansour initially chose former opposition leader Mohamed el-Baradei as prime minister of the interim government on July 6.000 injured. Mohamed Morsi focused more on maximizing his own power and that of the Muslim Brotherhood than on addressing Egypt’s worsening economic.

Washington also has a humanitarian interest in preventing food shortages if Egypt’s social fabric continues to unravel. and political stability will likely be elusive until the country’s worsening economic situation is reversed. and the figure is much higher for young men. and other Western companies. police. and preventing the eruption of a full-blown civil war on the scale of Algeria’s in the heart of the Arab world. Egypt’s Coptic Christian minority. Islamist extremists will likely target tourists once again to undermine the new government. 2824 JULY 11. about 10 percent of Egypt’s more than 80 million people. joined non-Islamist opposition parties in pushing for early elections. The army cannot stabilize Egypt without resolving Egypt’s worsening economic problems.000 lives since the Algerian Army stepped in to avert an Islamist election victory in 1991. surging crime rates. preventing the rise of an Islamist totalitarian state. symbols of the anti-Morsi revolution such as Tahrir Square. Left unchecked. Foreign currency reserves are nearly exhausted. American companies. particularly in southern Egypt.BACKGROUNDER | NO. The army can only do so much to repair Egypt’s dysfunctional political system. It inevitably will lose popular support the longer it rules. will likely become even more of a lightning rod for terrorist attacks. it cannot stabilize Egypt without resolving Egypt’s worsening economic problems. a Salafist movement that favors the immediate imposition of Sharia law and resented Morsi’s high-handed efforts to monopolize political power. labor strikes. Sitting on a Volcano Egypt. Egypt has fallen into dire economic straits. Egypt’s economic woes have created a huge reservoir of unemployed youth who are vulnerable to the siren call of radical ideologies. the largest Arab country. The United States has a national interest in stabilizing Egypt. There will likely be a surge in anti-Christian attacks. bread riots. it could devolve into an even bloodier version of Algeria’s civil war. Egypt is imploding in a bitter political struggle fought amid economic collapse. particularly Islamist extremism.S. social turmoil. The Nour Party. and government facilities. The army needs to put Egypt’s house in order quickly and then get out of the way. It eagerly 3 U. is a bellwether for the Arab Middle East. The political turmoil and rising crime rates of the past two years have severely hurt tourism. Islamists charge that Egypt’s ancient Christian community was complicit in inciting protests to bring down Morsi. Nearly one-quarter of Egypt’s workers are unemployed. The imminent bankruptcy of Egypt’s state-dominated economy could quickly lead to catastrophic food shortages. An outburst of violence by Islamist extremists could open a dangerous new chapter in Egypt’s unfinished revolution. Moreover. The splintered Islamist movement is by no means unified in support of Morsi. Help Needed in the Struggle for Freedom . which has consumed more than 100. which will require considerable American and international support. 2013 Islamist militants will likely soon expand their attacks beyond the Sinai region to include army. embassy. widespread unemployment. and symbols of “foreign conspiracies” such as the U. The Obama Administration has been asleep at the switch for much of the past two years. who form the shock troops for street protests. a focal point for sectarian violence. falling standards of living. and growing political polarization. which will require considerable American and international support. anti-Morsi political groups. who supported the military intervention. and rising sectarian tensions. Morsi further sabotaged the tourism industry by appointing as governor of Luxor Province a member of the Islamist terrorist group that massacred 62 tourists in Luxor in 1997—not exactly a reassuring signal for nervous tourists. which provide nearly half of Egypt’s food consumption.S. as it did between Mubarak’s fall in February 2011 and Morsi’s purge of top army leaders in August 2012. Other Islamists will likely increasingly criticize and ostracize the Nour leaders. which will make it difficult to pay for wheat imports. Egypt’s army is sitting on a volcano and knows it. which formerly generated the bulk of Egypt’s foreign currency earnings and provided jobs to about one of every seven workers.

All the while. It is also likely that an opponent will attempt to demoralize one’s populace and that appropriate defensive measures will have to be taken. Psychological Warfare Knowledge. and tactics. 3 . but once the conflict is concluded. p.”6 In order to undermine the opponent’s morale. including the “Great Firewall of China. can create a strong psychological impact. regret. and similar outlets. To be effective. or winning a piece of ground. both to understand an opponent better and to lay the groundwork for effective wartime operations. psychological warfare operations cannot be limited to wartime. especially among senior military and civilian leaders. The primary objective of such efforts is to generate confusion. one must emphasize information favorable to oneself through various forms of media as well as through third parties.BACKGROUNDER | NO. population. undermining their positions. portraying them as fostering ill intentions. such a campaign will induce neglect and maximize the chances of an opponent making mistakes. implicit views in order to make that opponent more susceptible to coercion. from the context to the biases. The GPD not only ensures political orthodoxy 6. offensive psychological warfare operations must be complemented by defensive measures. including diplomatic efforts. 14. it is not solely by killing the enemy. Instead. employing all the tools of communications. coupled with efforts to influence decision makers. psychological operations shift emphasis towards more specifically military targets and goals. operations. terror. Guo. and among strategy. emphasizes one’s own strengths as well as a willingness to employ that strength to deter and coerce opponents more effectively.” Chinese Concept of Psychological Warfare Tasks For the PLA. and leaders. influencing the course of the conflict. peacetime psychological operations are necessary. 2821 JULY 11. Successful psychological operations will therefore have repercussions at every level of operations. thereby degrading opposition decision-making processes. and forcing them to react to a variety of charges so that their energy is dispersed. Such defensive measures require tight control of information flows in one’s own society and the insulation of one’s decision-makers and decision-making processes from enemy information warfare efforts. between military and civilian. working in coordination with the rest of the PLA. The ability to interfere with an opponent’s information systems. one must be working to counter opponents’ efforts to foster their own image of strength and unity. one can foster a positive national image and increase foreign sympathy and support for one’s own policies and goals. but is mainly in terms of cowing the enemy’s heart. Ideally. and exhaustion in an opponent. Not only will this help generate war-weariness among enemy forces and populations and discourage resistance. This need for control explains Beijing’s efforts to limit cyber access to the larger population. and instill confidence and support for the Party and the state. highlight one’s successes and the enemy’s failures. fear. including various forms of media. In addition. friendly elements in the opponent’s society. At the same time. Wartime psychological warfare operations also aim to generate a sense of uncertainty and indecisiveness at all levels. Another facet of wartime psychological operations is the sowing of discord and a sense of hopelessness in the enemy. PLA writings emphasize that modern information technology blurs the lines between peacetime and wartime. “When one defeats the enemy. such techniques attempt to isolate opponents. Finally. however. Peacetime applications of psychological warfare techniques involve influencing and altering an opponent’s unconscious. anxiety. such operations may facilitate peace negotiations and induce more concessions. By employing various forms of strategic communications. In wartime. 2013 very perceptions that inform decision making. One must therefore attempt to solidify popular support for the conflict. doubt. psychological warfare is the resposibility of the General Political Department (GPD). since an opponent will also be trying to undermine one’s own forces.

and other Western companies. joined non-Islamist opposition parties in pushing for early elections. labor strikes. Egypt has fallen into dire economic straits. Morsi further sabotaged the tourism industry by appointing as governor of Luxor Province a member of the Islamist terrorist group that massacred 62 tourists in Luxor in 1997—not exactly a reassuring signal for nervous tourists.S. Other Islamists will likely increasingly criticize and ostracize the Nour leaders. it cannot stabilize Egypt without resolving Egypt’s worsening economic problems. preventing the rise of an Islamist totalitarian state. a Salafist movement that favors the immediate imposition of Sharia law and resented Morsi’s high-handed efforts to monopolize political power.000 lives since the Algerian Army stepped in to avert an Islamist election victory in 1991. which provide nearly half of Egypt’s food consumption. It eagerly 3 U. Sitting on a Volcano Egypt. social turmoil. will likely become even more of a lightning rod for terrorist attacks. and the figure is much higher for young men. Help Needed in the Struggle for Freedom . Islamists charge that Egypt’s ancient Christian community was complicit in inciting protests to bring down Morsi. Egypt’s Coptic Christian minority. police. 2824 JULY 11. The splintered Islamist movement is by no means unified in support of Morsi. Foreign currency reserves are nearly exhausted. Islamist extremists will likely target tourists once again to undermine the new government. The army cannot stabilize Egypt without resolving Egypt’s worsening economic problems.S. which formerly generated the bulk of Egypt’s foreign currency earnings and provided jobs to about one of every seven workers. Moreover. 2013 Islamist militants will likely soon expand their attacks beyond the Sinai region to include army. and growing political polarization. who supported the military intervention. The Obama Administration has been asleep at the switch for much of the past two years. which will require considerable American and international support. particularly in southern Egypt. the largest Arab country. which has consumed more than 100. and political stability will likely be elusive until the country’s worsening economic situation is reversed. bread riots. Egypt’s army is sitting on a volcano and knows it. The United States has a national interest in stabilizing Egypt. Washington also has a humanitarian interest in preventing food shortages if Egypt’s social fabric continues to unravel. surging crime rates. symbols of the anti-Morsi revolution such as Tahrir Square. The army needs to put Egypt’s house in order quickly and then get out of the way. which will require considerable American and international support. about 10 percent of Egypt’s more than 80 million people.BACKGROUNDER | NO. The Nour Party. and rising sectarian tensions. and government facilities. who form the shock troops for street protests. particularly Islamist extremism. it could devolve into an even bloodier version of Algeria’s civil war. There will likely be a surge in anti-Christian attacks. and preventing the eruption of a full-blown civil war on the scale of Algeria’s in the heart of the Arab world. embassy. as it did between Mubarak’s fall in February 2011 and Morsi’s purge of top army leaders in August 2012. Left unchecked. It inevitably will lose popular support the longer it rules. anti-Morsi political groups. widespread unemployment. The imminent bankruptcy of Egypt’s state-dominated economy could quickly lead to catastrophic food shortages. Nearly one-quarter of Egypt’s workers are unemployed. a focal point for sectarian violence. which will make it difficult to pay for wheat imports. Egypt is imploding in a bitter political struggle fought amid economic collapse. is a bellwether for the Arab Middle East. The army can only do so much to repair Egypt’s dysfunctional political system. American companies. An outburst of violence by Islamist extremists could open a dangerous new chapter in Egypt’s unfinished revolution. The political turmoil and rising crime rates of the past two years have severely hurt tourism. falling standards of living. Egypt’s economic woes have created a huge reservoir of unemployed youth who are vulnerable to the siren call of radical ideologies. and symbols of “foreign conspiracies” such as the U.

5 billion in annual U. and freedom of religion. The lack of a shared understanding of the rules of the game enabled Morsi to stage a power grab. aid. and abuses. democratic. the United States should: ■■ Press Egypt’s army to hold elections and step aside as soon as possible. 2013 embraced Morsi’s Muslim Brotherhood–dominated government and was surprised that Egypt’s people so quickly became violently opposed to Islamist rule. and play a stabilizing role in the volatile Middle East. What the U. Army War College in 2006. and Egypt in 2011. It should also find an inclusive way of writing a new constitution to establish the rules of the political competition before elections. Should Do In addressing Egypt’s deepening crisis. Foreign Operations. angry that the Obama Administration uncritically supported the Morsi regime. 2012. Secular. President Mansour has laid out a vague timetable for a constitutional referendum in four and a half months and parliamentary elections in six months.S. not leading a backlash against American policy. This led Egypt’s secular and liberal opposition to turn to Egypt’s army in despair.BACKGROUNDER | NO. Egyptian advocates of freedom should know that Americans support their efforts and do not side with an Islamist authoritarian leader who is hostile to American values and policies.S. 2012. 2824 JULY 11. It remains to be seen whether Egypt’s latest coup will succeed in salvaging Egypt’s dim democratic prospects. General el-Sissi reportedly was a student at the U. The United States should support freedom in Egypt to advance its own interests as well as those of the Egyptian people. The Obama Administration failed to publicly criticize Morsi’s excesses.. freedom of speech. Many protesters demonstrating against Morsi before the coup also carried signs protesting President Obama’s support for the Morsi regime. support economic reforms to revive the economy. The Obama Administration has stopped short of calling the army’s intervention a coup to avoid triggering an aid cutoff. The interim government established by the army has a better chance of laying the groundwork for a democratic transition than did Morsi’s regime. and Related Programs Appropriations Act.S. The fact that Egyptians resent the Obama Administration’s courting of the Muslim Brotherhood should be a wake-up call for the White House.S. Section 7008 of the Department of State. The Administration gambled that the practical responsibilities of governing would dilute the hostile anti-Western ideology of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Administration has called for a transparent and inclusive political transition process. Yet once in office. and the restrictions that the Morsi government placed on freedom of the press. felt no need to compromise with the opposition or temper his Islamist ambitions because the Administration was reluctant to use the leverage afforded by $1. Egypt’s military leaders are much more likely than Morsi’s cronies to advance freedom in Egypt. However. aid to Egypt.S. bars “any assistance to the government of any country whose duly elected head of government is deposed by military coup d’état or decree or. policy toward Egypt has gone off the rails. a coup d’état or decree ■■ 4 . power grabs.S. In any event. Washington should urge the interim government to adhere to this timetable. but the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist parties should be allowed to participate only if they publicly choose a path of nonviolence. in which case he may have absorbed the professional standards and nonpartisan apolitical tradition of the U. Attach tight strings to any U. as contained in the Consolidated Appropriations Act. which was headed for dictatorship. after the date of enactment of this Act. The Obama Administration’s enthusiasm for the Muslim Brotherhood led it to turn a blind eye to Morsi’s power grabs. Morsi relentlessly expanded his own power in a winner-take-all manner while neglecting Egypt’s festering economic problems. Morsi.S. for his part. the crackdown on pro-democracy nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that the Mubarak regime formerly tolerated. Army. and liberal Egyptians opposed to an Islamist takeover should be natural allies of the U. Military coups have advanced the prospects for democracy at least two times in the past: Portugal in 1974. General el-Sissi’s “road map” for a democratic transition included no dates. the rising persecution of Egypt’s Coptic Christian minority. It is a sad sign that U.

coupled with efforts to influence decision makers. and similar outlets. one must be working to counter opponents’ efforts to foster their own image of strength and unity. Ideally. p. psychological warfare operations cannot be limited to wartime. psychological operations shift emphasis towards more specifically military targets and goals. All the while. implicit views in order to make that opponent more susceptible to coercion.” Chinese Concept of Psychological Warfare Tasks For the PLA. PLA writings emphasize that modern information technology blurs the lines between peacetime and wartime. both to understand an opponent better and to lay the groundwork for effective wartime operations. 3 . and instill confidence and support for the Party and the state. Another facet of wartime psychological operations is the sowing of discord and a sense of hopelessness in the enemy. portraying them as fostering ill intentions. working in coordination with the rest of the PLA. and among strategy.”6 In order to undermine the opponent’s morale. One must therefore attempt to solidify popular support for the conflict. or winning a piece of ground. In addition. one must emphasize information favorable to oneself through various forms of media as well as through third parties.BACKGROUNDER | NO. it is not solely by killing the enemy. Guo. and exhaustion in an opponent. including various forms of media. terror. Finally. can create a strong psychological impact. At the same time. The primary objective of such efforts is to generate confusion. doubt. such a campaign will induce neglect and maximize the chances of an opponent making mistakes. offensive psychological warfare operations must be complemented by defensive measures. highlight one’s successes and the enemy’s failures. however. friendly elements in the opponent’s society. and leaders. fear. It is also likely that an opponent will attempt to demoralize one’s populace and that appropriate defensive measures will have to be taken. This need for control explains Beijing’s efforts to limit cyber access to the larger population. regret. including the “Great Firewall of China. 2821 JULY 11. population. undermining their positions. Not only will this help generate war-weariness among enemy forces and populations and discourage resistance. “When one defeats the enemy. Psychological Warfare Knowledge. but once the conflict is concluded. To be effective. Instead. thereby degrading opposition decision-making processes. and tactics. By employing various forms of strategic communications. including diplomatic efforts. 14. Wartime psychological warfare operations also aim to generate a sense of uncertainty and indecisiveness at all levels. Such defensive measures require tight control of information flows in one’s own society and the insulation of one’s decision-makers and decision-making processes from enemy information warfare efforts. and forcing them to react to a variety of charges so that their energy is dispersed. The ability to interfere with an opponent’s information systems. 2013 very perceptions that inform decision making. especially among senior military and civilian leaders. emphasizes one’s own strengths as well as a willingness to employ that strength to deter and coerce opponents more effectively. employing all the tools of communications. peacetime psychological operations are necessary. In wartime. but is mainly in terms of cowing the enemy’s heart. such techniques attempt to isolate opponents. psychological warfare is the resposibility of the General Political Department (GPD). between military and civilian. anxiety. one can foster a positive national image and increase foreign sympathy and support for one’s own policies and goals. influencing the course of the conflict. Successful psychological operations will therefore have repercussions at every level of operations. operations. from the context to the biases. since an opponent will also be trying to undermine one’s own forces. The GPD not only ensures political orthodoxy 6. such operations may facilitate peace negotiations and induce more concessions. Peacetime applications of psychological warfare techniques involve influencing and altering an opponent’s unconscious.

S. In particular. http://www.pdf (accessed June 25. Energy Information Administration.com/ watch?v=DpTIhyMa-Nw (accessed June 26. 10. the EPA is also regulating coal combustion residues and cooling water intake structures and is considering more stringent smog standards. Smith. Loris. 2013). 2012. 2709.eia. all of which make the use of coal power more expensive.ISSUE BRIEF | NO. the Supreme Court granted the EPA’s request to review its cross-state air pollution rule.org/research/reports/2012/07/the-assault-on-coal-and-american-consumers.S.10 Coal mining operations are subject to 10 federal environmental laws as well as state requirements and regulations. While it may not be clear exactly which policies will be used. “North American Energy Inventory.washingtonpost. 8. July 23. heritage. Electricity prices rise by 20 percent.nerc. 4. Most recently. The analysis shows significant economic losses extend beyond the obvious areas of coal mining and power generation.’” The Washington Post.pdf (accessed June 24. Senator Barack Obama (D–IL). Under the proposed rule. 2013).000 jobs. January 17. air quality has improved significantly over the past several decades.” October 2010. U. 3978 JUnE 27. Institute for Energy Research. 2. Although not a new problem. Department of Energy.” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. it seems clear that zeroing-out coal-fired electric power plants is a goal of this Administration’s environmental team. http:/ /www. 11. By the agency’s own admission. 2013.000 per year. 2013 pollutants. Nicolas D. 5. 9. ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ The Energy Markets Respond. and Natural gas prices rise 42 percent. 2011. Steven F. “Obama Science Adviser Calls for ‘War on Coal. those plants already in the permitting process would not be included.500 over the period of analysis. http:/ /www. Climate Policy and Coal. North American Electric Reliability Corporation. Aggregate gross domestic product (GDP) decreases by $1. To date. April 2011. http:/ /www. http:/ /www. 2011 Almanac of Environmental Trends. 3.8 In the absence of these new regulations.cfm (accessed June 24.47 trillion.energyforamerica. “What Is the Role of Coal in the United States?” July 18.000 jobs. and its total income drops by $16. we find that by 2030: ■■ Employment falls by more than 500. 2013). 34. 2013). 2012. “Technical Comments on the Regulatory Impact Analysis Supporting EPA’s Proposed Rule for Utility MACT and Revised NSPS (76 FR 24976). This paper will analyze the economic impact of setting such a target.com/nera-files/PUB_Smith_EPA_report_0811. “2010 Special Reliability Scenario Assessment: Resource Adequacy Impact of Potential U. See the appendix for a description of the HEM and the methodology used in this paper.” NERA Economic Consulting. Emission of toxic pollutants has dropped as much as 96 percent since 1980. Manufacturing loses over 280. U.pdf (accessed June 24. Environmental Regulations. Perhaps even more problematic is how to dispose of the 15–20 super tankers’ worth of liquid carbon dioxide that widespread carbon capture would create. 6.aei. The analysis was carried out using the Heritage Energy Model (HEM). which would compel companies to retire three to seven gigawatts of electricity generation and retrofit up to 576 plants. http:/ /www. Aaron Blake. A family of four’s annual income drops more than $1.youtube. Coal-mining jobs drop 43 percent. 2013). Hayward. http:/ /www. regulations from the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement and the Mine Safety and Health Administration make building new coal mining operations or expanding existing operations increasingly difficult. 2013). 2 .nera.S. 7.” December 2011.pdf (accessed June 24. “The Assault on Coal and the American Consumer.org/wp-content/ uploads/2012/06/Energy-InventoryFINAL. August 3.7 In addition.9 The attack on coal reaches well beyond power plant construction and operation. the rule will cost $10 billion by 2015 but have only $6 million in purported benefits from mercury reductions.org/ files/2011/04/20/Hayward-almanac2011. 2008. We look at the first 16 years of a 20-year phase-out of coal power: 2015–2030. 2013). gov/energy_in_brief/article/role_coal_us.com/files/EPA_Scenario_Final_v2. http:/ /www.com/blogs/ post-politics/wp/2013/06/25/obama-science-adviser-calls-for-war-on-coal/ (accessed June 26. Anne E.11 As coal-fired power generation is ratcheted 1. no one has successfully operated a utility-scale carbon-capture power plant. American Enterprise Institute. interview with the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board. June 25. p.

iteratively executing and allowing the various modules to interact with each other. assumptions. pp. x2 . Convergence checks are performed for each price and quantity statistic to determine whether subsequent changes in that particular statistic fall within a given tolerance. using approximate values for the other unknowns. 3978 JUnE 27. Unlike NEMS.15 NEMS is used by the Energy Information Administration of the Department of Energy as well as various nongovernmental organizations for a variety of purposes.. For example. A Residential Demand Module. HEM focuses on the interactions among (1) the supply. HEM is based on well-established economic theory as well as historical data and contains a variety of modules that interact with each other for longterm forecasting.. Vol. (2) American energy and the overall American economy. and (4) current production and consumption decisions as well as expectations about the future. 17. 18. and opinions in this report are entirely the work of CDA statisticians and economists and have not been endorsed by and do not necessarily reflect the views of the owners of the IHS Global Insight model. and the process iterates.eia. After all group values for the current cycle are determined. HEM’s module does not make projections regarding commercial floor-space data of pertinent commercial buildings. A. Gabriel. and a pertinent subsystem of equations and inequalities corresponding to each group is solved via a variety of commonly used numerical analytic techniques. xn ) R ber of diagnostic measures. Energy Information Administration. In particular. Unknown variables that are related (such as if they are a component of a particular module) are grouped together. . A. S. The methodologies. assumptions. and A Natural Gas Transmission and Distribution Module. including forecasting the effects of energy policy changes on a plethora of leading economic indicators. ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ A Macroeconomic Activity Module. Department of Energy. the next group is solved similarly. Ibid. HEM’s Macroeconomic Activity Module makes use of the IHS Global Insight model. An Oil and Gas Supply Module. A Coal Market Module. 4 . and demand of energy in its various forms. a variety of n pertinent statistics represented by the vector j j n (xj is obtained. conversion. conclusions. based on differences 15.18 HEM provides a num1 . 49 (2001). pp. which is used by government agencies and Fortune 500 organizations to forecast the manifestations of economic events and policy changes on notable economic indicators. conclusions. This analysis uses the Heritage Energy Model (HEM)..17 A Transportation Demand Module.16 These modules include: ■■ ■■ An Electricity Market Module. 2013). “The National Energy Modeling System: An Overview. U. As with NEMS.pdf (accessed April 3.ISSUE BRIEF | NO. Kydes. (3) the American energy market and the world petroleum market. An International Energy Activity Module. and opinions in this report are entirely the work of statisticians and economists at The Heritage Foundation’s Center for Data Analysis and have not been endorsed by and do not necessarily reflect the views of the developers of NEMS. the methodologies. An Industrial Demand Module.. 3–4. 16. the next cycle begins.gov/ oiaf/aeo/overview/pdf/0581(2009). 14–25. 2013 Appendix: Methodology Overview of Heritage Energy Model.S. Overarching the above modules is an Integrating Module that consistently cycles. A Commercial Demand Module.” http:/ /www. Once these group’s values are computed. ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ ■■ HEM is identical to NEMS with the exception of the Commercial Demand Module. and P. “The National Energy Modeling System: A Large-Scale Energy-Economic Equilibrium Model.” Operations Research. Whitman. at cycle j. A Petroleum Market Module. a derivative of the National Energy Model System (NEMS). S. A Renewable Fuels Module.

”3 Since meeting deterrence and military requirements was clearly not foremost in President Obama’s mind when he chose these numbers. 2013). And I say this in light of—when we talk about the nondeployed portion of the arsenal—it is sized to be able to allow us to hedge against both technical failures in the current deployed arsenal and any 1. video file.foreign. this has been and remains President Obama’s highest priority in U.S. but fails to indicate that an agreement with Russia is in any way necessary or that any agreement with Russia will be concluded as a treaty in accordance with the law. Commits to reducing the number of U. the numbers recommended in the NPRIS were essentially chosen for aesthetic reasons. Baker Spring.S. http:/ /www. http:/ /www. General Kevin Chilton testified about the proper relationship between the numbers and deterrence capabilities: I do not agree that [the number of nuclear weapons in the U.gov/thepress-office/2012/03/26/remarks-president-obama-hankuk-university (accessed May 29. the true number he desires is zero. South Korea: “But even as we have more work to do. but even he recognizes that the American people will reject an attempt to go directly to zero nuclear weapons. geopolitical concerns that might…cause us to need more weapons deployed. it states the U. 4. the preponderance of the evidence strongly suggests that the scope of the reduction was chosen first and the NPRIS was pursued to justify it.S. “Twelve Flaws of New START That Will Be Difficult to Fix.S.S. See 22 U. Yet as detailed in the next section of this paper.whitehouse. Specifically. U.” Clearly. 2466. 2 5.S.S. intends to seek the reductions in negotiations with Russia. what was? The overwhelming evidence suggests that he was focused on reaching his declared goal of zero U.S. Indeed. . September 16.BACKGROUNDER | NO.5 Asserts that the United States will maintain a credible nuclear deterrent. 2012). we can already say with confidence that we have more nuclear weapons than we need. 2. Barack Obama. “Nuclear Weapons Employment Strategy of the United States.senate. Senate.gov/the-pressoffice/2013/06/19/fact-sheet-nuclear-weapons-employment-strategy-united-states (accessed June 19. 111–5): Views from the Pentagon.S. In July 2010.org/research/reports/2010/09/twelve-flaws-of-new-start-that-will-be-difficult-to-fix.S. The NPRIS ■■ According to the fact sheet. in contrast to the commitment to disarmament. 2010. “Remarks by President Obama at Hankuk University. These numbers look about right as an intermediate step between what is permitted by New START after its execution and zero. strategic nuclear weapons by up to onethird below New START levels.” The White House. President Obama indicated his thinking more than a year ago in a speech at Hankuk University in Seoul. General Kevin P.” June 19. Code § 2573. 2013).S. Strategic Command during President Obama’s first term. The fact sheet states this determination was made after a comprehensive review of the requirements for nuclear forces. Committee on Foreign Relations.” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No. The second most important aspect of the NPRIS is the commitment to reduce the number of U. 2013 the numbers of nuclear weapons that would meet the requirements. Chilton. March 26. http:/ /www. 2013.whitehouse... nuclear weapons. 2826 JULY 11. June 16. nuclear weapons may now be reduced further. nuclear weapons in the pursuit of his aspiration for zero nuclear weapons is bolstered by a statement by the then-Commander of U. arsenal] is more than is needed. testimony in The New START Treaty (Treaty Doc. 111th Cong. Accordingly. 2nd Sess. nuclear posture will remain ■■ ■■ The White House. nuclear weapons policy.gov/hearings/the-new-start-treaty-treaty-doc-111-5views-from-the-pentagon (accessed May 8. http://www.S. This likelihood that President Obama is foremost concerned about reducing the number of U. I think the arsenal that we have is exactly what is needed today to provide the deterrent. the NPRIS: Reaffirms the President’s goal of achieving “the peace and security of a world without nuclear weapons. 2012. 2010. strategic nuclear weapons.heritage.4 His testimony sharply contrasts with the assertion in the NPRIS that U. The fact sheet further states that the U. which the fact sheet reaffirms in its first paragraph. 3.

history suggests that foreign tyrannies do not value their people.heritage. the ■■ The evidence in the NPRIS fact sheet supporting the argument that the numbers were chosen for reasons of arms control and disarmament. and its allies. This is problematic because a countervalue targeting policy is not compatible with the values of the U.S. in the direction of “countervalue targeting.9 No U. deterrence posture for both the U. The most significant flaws are: Flaw #1: An obscure targeting policy. This is the inevitable result when arms control and disarmament goals. and Russia in short-range nuclear weapons. President would choose to use nuclear weapons to cause widespread death and destruction in an enemy country in which the population is repressed and poses no significant threat to the U. and its allies. 1.” Heritage Foundation Backgrounder No.S.S..S. they value the means of repressing their populations and of threatening free nations. This requirement is designed to force the Department of Defense.S. 4 . which go beyond the numbers themselves. 9. The NPRIS states that U. These Evidence of Arms Control and Disarmament-Driven Numbers 8. is focused on maintaining and improving strategic stability with both Russia and China. nuclear posture in a year’s time. States that the U. The fact sheets states that the President has directed the Department of Defense to use the new guidance resulting from the NPRIS to begin updating and aligning its directives and contingency plans in order to implement this policy over the next year. while protecting and defending the populations and economic capacity of the U. was founded on the principle of liberty. Notes that the President has directed the DOD to begin updating and aligning its directives and contingency plans with the new guidance and to implement them over the course of the next year.org/research/reports/2012/11/deterrence-and-nuclear-targeting-in-the-21st-century. Strategic Command. 2747.S. Presumably. deterrent. ■■ The most effective nuclear deterrent for the U. “Deterrence and Nuclear Targeting in the 21st Century. November 30. if followed. The fact sheet states that NPRIS did not set out to address this matter. not strengthening the overall U. as a free country and therefore is not compatible with a credible deterrent. that pose an ideological threat to their repressive regimes. against a repressive regime would be a “counterforce policy” that targets the regime’s internal security forces and strategic military forces.S. recommendations. particularly U. Instead.8 For whatever reason. 2012. not for deterrence and defense.S. against a repressive regime would be a “counterforce policy” that targets the regime’s internal security forces and strategic military forces.S. Finally. The accompanying DOD employment report acknowledges that the DOD has received this guidance document. the President is in a rush. not just directly but in short order.S. policy is to narrow the requirements for its nuclear employment and targeting policy. because the U.S. particularly in relation to such weapons deployed in Europe.S.. Further. to redesign the U.S. Indeed. Rebeccah Heinrichs and Baker Spring. http://www.S. the most effective nuclear deterrent for the U. would result in a dangerously weak U. must remain vulnerable to nuclear attacks by either Russia or China. Deferring this issue represents a presidential repudiation of his commitment to the Senate to address the matter. 2013 ■■ Defers the question of reducing the disparity between the U. this further codifies the earlier stated policy that the U.S.S.S.S. it values the security and prosperity of its people. Thus. in the form of a directive to the Department of Defense. The NPRIS is accompanied by a guidance document. the reduced number of deployed strategic nuclear weapons will drive the U. 2826 JULY 11.S. p. nuclear force.” targeting populations and economic centers. including the U. follows from the wide variety of flaws in the report’s recommendations.BACKGROUNDER | NO. Ibid. However. drive a review of the U. and its allies.

C. Accordingly. strategic nuclear force less survivable. than would be presented by population centers under a countervalue targeting policy.700 to 2. Flaw #2: Insufficient survivability for the U. many of them hardened against attack with reinforced bunkers. The NPRIS fact sheet says nothing about why it relies on the target sets that are shrinking enough to permit reducing the number of operationally deployed strategic nuclear warheads by one-third from the 1. needs to deter maintain multiple levers of internal repression and strategic military capabilities to threaten the nations of the free world. strategic nuclear posture. 11. not to mention the 1.senate.S. letter to Senator John McCain. 2826 JULY 11. The plan included targets that are hardened and deeply buried facilities. 2011.550 accountable warheads under New START.mccain.700 and 2.” Federation of American Scientists and the Natural Resources Defense Council Occasional Paper No. U. http://www. The Obama Administration apparently has chosen to gloss over this apparent contradiction in the NPRIS.S.12 An attachment to his letter states that these cuts could eliminate the ICBM leg of the triad. 4.10 Accordingly. Indeed. Former Air Force Chief of Staff Larry Welch explained the link between preservation of the ICBM leg and survivability in a speech in Washington. 10. 2013 accompanying DOD report finds the argument in favor of countervalue targeting so weak that it categorically denies the guidance from the White House requiring that the DOD to pursue it. whether such a strike will remain exceedingly remote would depend on the future structure of the U. 2012). Department of Defense. The fact sheet asserts that a disarming strike against U. Kristensen. The reductions recommended by NPRIS would likely make the U. the numbers of deployed strategic nuclear warheads found necessary by the George W.S.gov/public/index. http:/ /www. the problem with the NPRIS is that a counterforce employment and targeting policy requires a larger and more capable force than the one the NPRIS recommends. Consequently. in press release. enemies.200.org/pubs/_docs/OccasionalPaper7.pdf (accessed June 18.S. For example. admittedly under the questionable assumption that such a targeting policy would present a strong deterrent posture toward current and future U. arsenal than proposed by the Obama Administration have openly argued for a “minimal deterrence” nuclear posture based on countervalue targeting. and Ivan Oelrich.S. dedicated advocates of lower numbers of nuclear weapons in the U.S.fas. which are fairly described as classic counterforce targets. For example.” November 14. April 2009. 12. Leon Panetta. The problem becomes even more pronounced if the U.. Secretary Panetta identified elimination of ICBMs as a plausible result of President Obama’s defense budget policies. “Report on Nuclear Employment Strategy. PressReleases&ContentRecord_id=a4074315-fd3e-2e65-2330-62b95da3b0e9 (accessed July 11. whereas the counterforce targeting policy identified in NPRIS must lead to relatively high numbers of nuclear weapons. “From Counterforce to Minimal Deterrence: A New Nuclear Policy on the Path Toward Eliminating Nuclear Weapons. they present larger numbers of targets.S. 7. 2011. strategic nuclear forces is “exceedingly remote. Bush Administration to meet the requirement to defeat strategic attacks and deter them was between 1.” p. The repressive regimes that the U. in a letter to Senator John McCain (R–AZ) on November 14. 2012). Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta explained how automatic spending cuts under the Budget Control Act of 2011 could affect the defense program. “Statement by Senators McCain and Graham on Secretary Panetta’s Letter Detailing ‘Devastating’ Impact of Sequester. nuclear force. By way of reference. see Hans M. The NPRIS provides only vague overall numbers. Norris.S.11 These advocates understand that a countervalue targeting policy would permit a significantly smaller nuclear force.S.BACKGROUNDER | NO.200 deemed necessary by the Bush Administration. faces a coalition of strategic enemies made possible by proliferation. 5 . Robert S.cfm?FuseAction=PressOffice. D. This contradiction exists between the White House guidance to the Department of Defense and the DOD nuclear employment report and within the DOD employment report. the fact sheet fails to identify clearly the nature of the connection that the NPRIS makes between its suggested targets and its recommended number of weapons.” However.

Finally. nuclear delivery systems that can rapidly and precisely attack targets will be of little value if not supported by a command and control system that is integrated with the global reconnaissance strike system. Flaw #7: Command and control problems are not seriously addressed. The existing U. However. needs new systems that can ensure the timely. in its 2009 report. nuclear force to the point that maintaining any such force can no longer be justified. if a President finds the yield to be too high to permit its use under a given circumstance. By outward appearances. Speed and precision of the new delivery vehicles should be key considerations in the modernization effort. Further. The U. the NPRIS fact sheet does not discuss the preferable yields for a full array of different weapons in the U. which is called extended deterrence. The overall capabilities of the nuclear command and control system are essential to determining the overall survivability of the force. which if left out would result in a relatively weak deterrent.S. strategic nuclear forces are essential to strengthening extended deterrence. 7 . particularly with ballistic missile submarines at sea. these forward-deployed weapons can fill in rungs in the escalation ladder. In fact. De-alerting is an effective step for artificially reducing the value of the U. they are not sufficient for this purpose by themselves.S. allies and friends that U. it does not address the yield question whatsoever.S. such as ICBMs mounted on mobile launchers. security assurances. This is a dangerous assumption. Flaw #8: The NPRIS defers consideration of the deterrence value of short-range weapons. particularly for extended deterrence. who are less confident in U. the NPRIS addresses neither issue. allies around the world.S. improved command and control systems for nuclear weapons are about more than survivability. While U. 2826 JULY 11.S. Accordingly. According to the fact sheet. needs to modernize the delivery systems for its nuclear forces for reasons that go beyond the need to replace the aging delivery systems. nuclear posture is considered weak by some allies and friends. A key variable in addressing the yield question is the accuracy of the overall weapon system. nuclear weapons deter strategic attacks not only against the U. The NPRIS fact sheet does not mention these requirements. nuclear arsenal. assurances about and the commitment to their security. Speed and reliability of communications are key considerations for modernizing nuclear command and control systems. allies into the overall deterrence posture. itself.BACKGROUNDER | NO.S. the broader command and control structure should be integrated with the global reconnaissance strike system. The U. which identifies strategic targets and rapidly and precisely directs weapons against the target.S.S. Further.S. Forward basing short-range nuclear weapons to address strategic threats to U. Disturbingly. the Strategic Posture Commission noted an emerging perception among some U. Higher yields do not always strengthen deterrence. higher accuracy permits lower yields in a counterforce targeting plan. highly precise delivery of weapons against time-sensitive targets. For example. both the NPRIS fact sheet and the DOD employment report fail to recognize the broader issues related to nuclear command and control. The yield of a specific nuclear weapon is critical to maximizing its deterrent effect under different circumstances.S. and neither does the Department of Defense employment report. it will detract from deterrence if a potential enemy calculates in advance that the President will recognize this problem. Maximizing the effectiveness of the deterrent is even more important than the question of the relationship between accuracy and yields. but also against U.S. Accordingly. weakness in non-strategic nuclear weapons was undermining their confidence in U.S. Generally speaking.S.S. forward-deployed nuclear forces increase the flexibility of the overall nuclear force and add to the military effectiveness of the broader nuclear force. Flaw #6: The fact sheet mentions no recommendations for appropriate yields of the weapons in the arsenal. This suggests that they assume that the yields of the current array of weapons are appropriate in every instance and will remain so for the indefinite future. U. 2013 Flaw #5: The fact sheet offers no commitment to modernize nuclear delivery systems. allies is also essential because these forward-deployed nuclear forces are tangible means of bringing U.S.

”15 The report further stated. Russia has a multifold advantage over the U. 21. can present would balance defensive forces and conventional strike forces with nuclear forces.S.S.BACKGROUNDER | NO. this disparity in short order. nuclear forces will be integrated with defensive forces and conventional strike forces. but also initial cueing and tracking to ballistic missile defense forces. Flaw #9: The NPRIS fails to explain how U. For example.S.S. At the moment.S. nuclear forces will also come down. Needless to say. the Administration is finding it inconvenient to acknowledge that it is producing a less effective nuclear force and a less effective deterrence posture. “Overall equivalence is important to many U. The President certified to the Senate during consideration of New START that he would address this matter and seek to reduce. The United States should not cede to Russia a posture of superiority in the name of deemphasizing nuclear weapons in the U. The NPRIS. Simply put. such as accelerating construction of the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement (CMRR) facility at Los Alamos National Laboratory.S. Indeed. conventional. the U. Now. defensive and conventional strike forces as replacements for. and the fact sheet acknowledges that the NPRIS did not address this matter in any substantive way. the most powerful overall deterrent the U. The Administration is all too happy to switch the subject and assure the America people that they will live in a world free of nuclear weapons. allies and friends that U. nuclear weapons infrastructure. in short-range nuclear forces. Specifically. which will reduce the capability of the force. the Administration cannot honestly assert that the overall cost-effectiveness of the nuclear force will increase under the NPRIS. strategic nuclear force fall to the levels required by the treaty. DC: United States Institute of Peace. 15.S.usip.”16 The Strategic Posture Commission noted an emerging perception among some U. weapons infrastructure. http://media.S. The NPRIS recommendations reduce the cost of the U.org/reports/strat_posture_report.S.S. nuclear force and its supporting elements by reducing the size of the force. the fact sheet indicates that the NPRIS sees U. On this point. nuclear weapons. the Administration is asserting that the U. The President is failing to keep some of his commitments to the Senate to modernize U. not only may safely reduce its strategic nuclear arsenal to New START levels. military strategy. Flaw #10: The Obama Administration continues to walk away from its commitments to the Senate to modernize the U. 2826 JULY 11.. 2013 Specifically the report states.S. These commitments served as the political and legal foundation for the Senate’s consent to the ratification of New START and its permission to let the U.S.S. can easily be interpreted to mean that the overall cost of U. There is no evidence that NPRIS considered the synergistic effects of fully integrating defensive./NATO forces are essential for restoring a sense of balance in the face of Russia’s nuclear renewal. 2009). if not eliminate. security assurances. its early warning capabilities will provide not only added flexibility to the nuclear and conventional strike forces. 8 . However.S. America’s Strategic Posture (Washington.S.pdf (accessed June 25.S. not complements to. 2013). Congressional Commission on the Strategic Posture of the United States. Ibid. Flaw #11: The NPRIS provides no assessment of the cost-effectiveness of the recommended nuclear force.S. but to onethird below New START levels. 16. all three must work within the global reconnaissance strike system because it can provide vital supporting functions to each.S. In a proliferating world. “Some allies located near Russia believe that U. nuclear force in meeting deterrence needs. focused as it is on reducing the numbers of U. He has not done so. the fact sheet simply seeks to mislead the public. 20. the facts indicate otherwise. p. p. non-strategic forces in Europe are essential to prevent nuclear coercion by Moscow and that modernized U. weakness in non-strategic nuclear weapons was undermining their confidence in U.S. allies in Europe. This means all three types of forces must be integrated in order to reinforce each other. and nuclear forces for strengthening deterrence.