Just five years ago the United States led a strong global effort to achieve indefinite extension of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) of 1970 which was due to expire on its 25th anniversary in April, 1995. U.S. leaders exerted substantial diplomatic pressure on nations less than enthusiastic about extending the NPT regime in order to ensure perpetuation of this critically important element of the global arms control structure, one very much in U.S. security interests.

The primary resistance to extending the Treaty in 1995 came from nations which complained about the failure of the five nuclear powers (China, France, Great Britain, Russia and the U.S.) to satisfy their obligations under Article VI of the Treaty.

Article VI was written into the Treaty originally as a major inducement to non-nuclear states to renounce their right to develop nuclear weapons even though the five nuclear powers were allowed to keep theirs. At the same time, however, Article VI clearly and unequivocally committed the nations with weapons to genuine efforts leading to nuclear disarmament:

Article VI
"Each of the Parties to the Treaty undertakes to pursue negotiations in good faith on effective measures relating to cessation of the nuclear arms race at an early date and to nuclear disarmament, and on a Treaty on general and complete disarmament under strict and effective international control."

The absolute failure of the nuclear weapons states to meet this commitment is evident through a straightforward comparison of nuclear arsenals in 1970 and 1995. In 1970 there were an estimated 39,700 nuclear weapons of all types in the arsenals of the five nuclear states. In 1995, despite the end of the Cold War, the totals stood at 43,200 weapons after 25 years of talking about reductions. Furthermore, the delivery systems for families of newer weapons had all been improved repeatedly to produce greatly increased lethality through greater range, accuracy and reliability. In short, after 25 years nuclear weapons posed an even greater threat of cataclysmic destruction, if not the very survival of the human race on earth.

Talking the Right Talk

This continuing threat produced concerted criticism of the nuclear haves by the have-nots and active resistance to approval of the indefinite extension of the NPT. In an effort to placate the critics, the five nuclear powers joined together to reaffirm their obligation under Article VI to move away from reliance on nuclear weapons for their own security. They did this in a statement entitled, "Principles and Objectives For Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament." Among other promises, this joint commitment pledged the five nations to "the determined pursuit by the nuclear weapons states of systematic and progressive efforts to reduce nuclear weapons globally, with the ultimate goal of eliminating those weapons...." This, the first unequivocal declaration of the goal of total elimination of all nuclear weapons, will unquestionably be the focus of non-nuclear states during the forthcoming U.N. conference in April and May 2000 to review compliance with the NPT.

What will the conferees "officially" discover at this five year review of the NPT?

Most regrettably, they will learn that the United States, which used powerful leadership in 1995 to obtain indefinite extension of the NPT, has become an active threat to the entire non-proliferation regime.

Walking the Wrong Walk

The most powerful evidence of this threat is in a document titled Presidential Decision Directive 60 (PDD 60) approved by President Clinton in November, 1997. Although highly classified and never formally released for consideration or debate by Congress or American citizens, certain provisions were selectively disclosed to the media. The first and most ominous decision in the directive is to retain nuclear weapons as the cornerstone of American security for the foreseeable future. It is difficult to conceive of a precept more contrary to the goals of nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. If the most powerful nation on earth declares nuclear weapons to be the cornerstone of its security, how can the other nuclear weapons nations be induced to cut their existing weapons stocks or those countries with no weapons be convinced not to create and possess them?

As if this U.S. stance were not threat enough, PDD 60 also includes other provocative provisions:

• The U.S. will maintain its Cold War nuclear weapons delivery triad of Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles ( ICBMs), Sea Launched Ballistic Missiles (SLBMs), and long range bombers.
• The U.S. will maintain a launch-on-warning posture with its strategic nuclear missiles. This will perpetuate the hair-trigger alert regimen maintained throughout the Cold War.
• The U.S. asserts the right to make first use of nuclear weapons, including the right ti use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear states in retaliation for chemical or biological weapons attacks.
• U.S. targeting plans will focus on Russia and China but will also include prospective nuclear states which might threaten U.S. interests in the future. Authoritative sources indicate that the U.S. has actually increased the number of targets in Russia since PDD 60 was issued.

Renewing Nucs

There is ample evidence that PDD 60 is not merely a policy statement. The Clinton administration has taken or reaffirmed a number of decisions that sustain and enhance U.S. nuclear war fighting capabilities and can maintain them indefinitely:

• Efforts to enhance the capability to design and test new nuclear weapons in our national laboratories using sub-critical explosive testing and advanced modeling procedures.
• Completing construction of the costly National Ignition Facility (NIF) at the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory.
• Resuming tritium production, using for the first time civilian power generating reactors for this purpose. By this action, the U.S. will breach the barrier between civilian and military use of nuclear power which the NPT is intended to maintain.
• Resuming limited production of plutonium pits for new or redesigned nuclear weapons.
• Rejecting Russian proposals to consider deeper reductions in the number of strategic warheads than the 2000-2500 range proposed by the U.S. during prospective START III negotiations.

Moreover, in an interview at Offut Air Force Base on March 16, 2000, Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre reportedly reaffirmed the U.S. position that "nuclear weapons are still the foundation of a superpower," thereby inviting other nations to develop and retain their weapons. A new U.S. Nuclear Mission Management Plan is expected to call for further modernization of the 550 Peacekeeper and Minuteman land-based missiles and 430 submarine-based Trident missiles.

In summary, five years ago the United States saw, clearly and correctly, that the Non-Proliferation Treaty was an important contribution to efforts to contain the spread of nuclear weapons around the world. Responsible leaders of the U.S. Arms Control and Disarmament Agency, backed by the Department of Defense and Department of State, worked forcefully to ensure that it would be extended indefinitely to provide a critical element of nuclear stability. Unfortunately, almost before the ink was dry on the NPT extension agreement, pro-nuclear arms factions in the Pentagon and White House began vigorous efforts to undermine the NPT. To our nation’s shame, the 1997 PDD 60 embodies their success.

Fallout from PDD 60

It is no coincidence that India, long a critic of the NPT because it imposed restrictions on non-nuclear states while granting nuclear weapons license to five nations, decided to resume nuclear testing and weapons development in 1998. Although India claimed that threats from a nuclear armed China were the reason for the tests, the cynical disavowal by the United States of its obligations under the NPT obviously enabled India to assert equal rights to develop nuclear weapons for its national security. Pakistani nuclear tests inevitably followed, using exactly the same justification.

There will be more Indias and Pakistans in the world’s future if the United States fails to satisfy well justified demands by the 182 non-nuclear signatories of the NPT to show genuine progress towards nuclear disarmament. The review conference beginning at the U.N. on April 24, 2000 could well produce significant withdrawals from the NPT regime if the United States continues to sustain and enhance its nuclear warfare capabilities as it is now doing. Furthermore, U.S. preparations to deploy a national missile defense system (even if it means abrogating the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty) and rejection of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty by the U.S. Senate are alarming signals to the rest of the world.

U.S. Responsibilities

The inescapable truth is that 55 years ago the United States initiated the nuclear era and created the danger of global nuclear war. We are the only nation ever to use nuclear weapons against an adversary. Throughout the Cold War America led the nuclear arms race every step of the way. Today we remain the unchallenged leader in nuclear warfighting capabilities. Given this record, it is undeniably true that if the Non-Proliferation Treaty is to remain effective, the U.S. must lead the way with positive measures to live up to our obligations under Article VI of that Treaty and to comply with the goal of nuclear disarmament leading to the total elimination of all nuclear weapons as set forth in the 1995 statement of "Principles and Objectives." Until America leads the way, the rest of the world will follow what we do, not what we say.

What You Can Do

There is very little time remaining for readers of The Defense Monitor to register their views on this critical issue before the U.N. NPT Review Conference officially convenes on April 24, 2000. If you wish the United States to take the lead at that conference by committing our nation to live up to its obligations to stop the spread of nuclear weapons around the world, you should act now. Write, phone or e-mail the White House, your Senators and your Representative to do the right thing while there is still time.

Our children and grandchildren will be far safer in the future if America leads the way to nuclear disarmament at the NPT Review Conference in April, 2000.

For more details and analysis, visit our Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction  page.
 

1972-1996    1997    1998    1999    2000