 The Perfect Soldier: Special Operations, Commandos, and the Future of Us Warfare by James F. Dunnigan
More Books by James Dunnigan
|
Dirty Little Secrets
Deciding When to Go Nuclear
by Harold C. Hutchison June 26, 2005
Discussion Board on this DLS topic
What would warrant the use of nuclear weapons? This is a huge question, and one
worth considering carefully. There are major implications to the use of nuclear
weapons. What would today be considered a smaller nuclear weapon (estimates of
the yield range from 13 to 20 kilotons) were the same type of weapon that killed
80,000 people outright (60,000 more died of radiation sickness) in the first
combat use of nuclear weapons in 1945.
Nuclear weapons are, in a sense,
the ultimate blunt instrument. The immense power and the after-effects of their
use make a surgical nuclear strike impossible. As a consequence, they are often
kept back, for use only in the most dire of circumstances. But what could bring
a country like the United States to the point of using a nuclear weapon on
another country? There are two possibilities that rank very high on this scale:
Iran and North Korea.
In this case of North Korea, the United States is
relying on their nuclear weapons primarily as a deterrent. The North Koreans do
have a mature chemical weapons capability, and they also have experimented with
biological weapons. This is in addition to a very small nuclear arsenal. North
Korea’s real risk is two-fold. North Korean leader Kim Jong-Il could decide that
he has nothing left to lose, or the cash-strapped North Koreans could sell the
nukes to someone else. Preemption of such a move could justify the use of
nuclear weapons. Should North Korea use any of its weapons of mass destruction,
that, too would result in the use of a nuclear weapon – if only to maintain the
credibility of deterrence.
Here is one other thing to note here: American
policy is to treat chemical and biological weapons as equivalent to nuclear
weapons. This is because the United States does not have any real offensive
biological warfare capability, and it has been destroying its chemical weapons
capability as well. This leaves the United States with only one response to any
chemical or biological attack.
The second possibility is Iran, which has
a very advanced biological weapons program (in advanced research and testing
now) and which also has a mature chemical weapons program, which makes and
produces varying chemical weapons. Iran is of great concern because it not only
has had generally bad relations with the United States (this is the predictable
result of the storming of the American embassy in Tehran back in 1979), but also
because it is known to be a major sponsor of Hezbollah, a terrorist organization
with a propensity for large-scale suicide attacks (like the bombing of the
Marine barracks in 1983). In effect, Hezbollah can be seen as a delivery system
for an Iranian WMD strike. What scares a lot of people about Iran is not that
they seek nuclear weapons for deterrence (say, against an attack), but that they
could provide WMD to Hezbollah, who then use it on an Israeli or American
target.
This is one case where not using nuclear weapons would be seen as
an act of weakness. The targets would probably be extensive. Iran has at least
four major chemical weapons facilities, at least one biological weapons
facility, plus the nuclear research program, which includes enrichment
facilities in at least three locations. A limited strike would still push the
death toll into the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, and a limited strike
would risk missing some of the Iranian systems. The only way to be sure Iran
would be incapable of launching a second attack would be to wipe Iran off the
map.
The other instance in which nuclear weapons could be used would be
the deflection of an incoming asteroid or comet. This is not as theoretical or
speculative as it might sound. Earth has recently had some near-misses and
scares (asteroid 2004 MN4 was one of the most recent in the news, another was
2004 FH).
The short version from looking at these examples is that
nuclear weapons are not going to be used lightly by the United States. Only in
cases where the United States or an ally is attacked first with WMD, facing
imminent attack with WMD, or facing serious damage or extinction from impact
from an asteroid or comet would the use become a highly possible event. Such a
situation is the stuff nightmares are made of.
|
|