America’s nuclear weapons neglect invites a new age of peril

OPINION:

Over the span of decades, America established a stable environment that controlled the types, quantities and deterrent role of nuclear weapons. Its hallmarks were frequent and open dialogue, comprehensive agreements and a mutual interest in nonproliferation. This was accomplished thoughtfully and consistently, using diplomacy, alliances, direct military-to-military engagement and a carefully crafted deployment of real capabilities that represented a credible but balanced show of strength. The benefits of this are impossible to understate. An existential threat to civilization was held at bay, the proliferation of nuclear states was significantly curtailed, and an unprecedented cessation of great power conflict was begun.

Throughout the modern era, great power warfare has existed within nearly every decade, causing the average annual death of 1.5% to 2% of the total human population. This culminated in World War II, when the nuclear age appeared and abruptly ended this historically unsolvable problem, now saving more than 120 million lives every year.

Unfortunately, subsequent administrations grew complacent.

Our forces, the foundation that enabled engagement, were allowed to dwindle and atrophy. Compounding this state, a misguided strategy of “leading by example” was adopted. For example, concerned about Russia’s tactical nukes, we unilaterally limited the number of our nuclear-armed cruise missiles. When this had no effect on the size of Russia’s vast tactical nuclear arsenal, we withdrew ours from active deployment. When Russia reciprocated by forward deploying theirs to the edge of European borders, we tried decommissioning ours. We have been slow learners.

Those with experience in negotiating with Russia know that Moscow sees all engagements as a net sum of zero. “Win-win” is not a concept in Russia’s book. Our naive strategy was flawed and has made the world more dangerous, not safer. Russian ruler Vladimir Putin has utterly rejected the prior environment of global cooperation. He has made it clear that he perceives the treaties and agreements of the past as disadvantageous to Russia, mistakes of weaker predecessors. He has followed up on these ideas with action. Russia is modernizing every nuclear system it has, introducing novel ones and expanding its warfighting tactical nukes.

Meanwhile, China has entered the conversation in a significant way. As big a chip as Mr. Putin has on his shoulder, Chinese President Xi Jinping’s sequoia-sized lump of wood dwarfs it with majestic enormity. Mr. Xi sees the current situation through the lens of China’s “century of humiliation.” Consequently, China has been categorically unwilling to have any substantive dialogue and has embarked on a nuclear buildup at full speed. Both nations have utterly rejected nonproliferation. They have provided technical and other assistance that has enabled North Korea to become a nuclear power with an ever-expanding arsenal and for Iran to become a threshold state that would be able to “quickly” move to nuclear status (although not quite as quickly as it would have had it not been introduced to American long-range bomber capabilities last summer).

You might ask why Messrs. Putin and Xi would spend precious money on nukes and risk a less stable world. The answer: They see it as an investment in a changing global environment of U.S. leadership with which they are deeply dissatisfied. They do not intend to use their nukes merely for a deterrent balance; in fact, they are already using them coercively to intimidate regional neighbors, undermine the confidence of U.S. allies and cause hesitation in the West.

Unchecked, this trajectory will play out in a terrifying sequence. First: The brandishing of tactical nukes, together with threats and rhetoric, will begin lowering the threshold for actual use. This is happening now. Second: Russian and Chinese local territorial objectives will be aided by credible nuclear coercion. Third: A regional conflict may turn bad, leading to a limited use of tactical nukes. At this point, everything changes. Either a major reset will happen, stepping back from the precipice, or nukes will become a routine part of the landscape, eventually risking the horror of a strategic exchange.

The United States cannot allow this situation to progress unchecked. We must bring Messrs. Putin and Xi to the table. To do that, we must look and be serious. We must modernize our systems, showing commitment to new and more capable systems. We must match and balance any Russian or Chinese capability while assembling a Golden Dome, making it obvious that these countries cannot count on a free hand. Then, and only then, can we force them into a meaningful dialogue and drive this situation back to one of stability.

• Tory Bruno, president and CEO of United Launch Alliance, spent three decades developing America’s strategic missile program, including Trident II D5. He is a member of the National Academies, an AIAA honorary fellow and academician of the International Academy of Astronautics.