Arms Control Today Article Reports: New Nuclear Plan Falls Short of Bush Pledge
Press Contacts: Daryl G. Kimball, Executive Director (202) 463 8270 x107; Hans M. Kristensen (202) 513-6249
(Washington, D.C.) A draft Pentagon doctrine calls for maintaining an aggressive nuclear posture with weapons on high alert to strike adversaries armed with weapons of mass destruction (WMD), pre-emptively if necessary, according to an article by Hans Kristensen published September 6 in Arms Control Today, the monthly journal of the Arms Control Association.
Nearly four years ago, the Bush administration unveiled its nuclear posture review, claiming that it would significantly change U.S. nuclear policy and reduce the role of nuclear weapons. Yet, as Hans M. Kristensen writes, "the new U.S. nuclear doctrine falls far short of fulfilling the administration's publicly stated goals. Instead of replacing the role of nuclear weapons, the new doctrine merely calls for conventional forces and missile defenses to complement them."
The doctrine, the first formal update since the Bush administration took office, is entitled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" and has been strongly influenced by the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR) and other directives published by the Bush administration since 2001. A final version is expected later this fall. The draft doctrine and editing comments were freely available on the Internet until recently, providing a rare glimpse into the secret world of nuclear planning in the post-Cold War era.
The full article is available on the Arms Control Association's website: http://www.armscontrol.org/act/2005_09/Kristensen.asp. Arms Control Today encourages reprints of its articles with permission of the Editor. The doctrine and related documents are available at http://www.nukestrat.com/us/jcs/jp.htm.
# # #
The Arms Control Association is an independent, nonprofit membership organization dedicated to promoting public understanding of and support for effective arms control policies.
My Account
ACA In The News
Letter to the Editor | Getting a global, nuclear NavyWashington Post
May 5, 2013
Why Chemical Weapons Have Been A Red Line Since World War I
National Public Radio
May 1, 2013
Building New Ballistic Missile Subs Could Demand Smaller Fleet, Navy Says
Global Security Newswire
May 1, 2013
Syria chemical weapons: Where did they come from?
The Christian Science Monitor
April 26, 2013
U.S. Gets "B-" for Anti-Nuclear Efforts
Global Security Newswire
April 25, 2013
US Gun Lobby Targets International Arms Treaty
Voice of America
April 25, 2013








