With rising global instability, caused primarily by the belligerence of the new China-Russia axis, these and other countries keep surprising America with their quest for new nuclear weapons and delivery systems, including the hypersonic variety.
According to Richard, the test was a “technological achievement with serious implications for strategic stability.”
The hypersonic reentry vehicle flew 25,000 miles in one hour and 40 minutes—“the greatest distance and longest flight time of any land attack weapon system of any nation to date,” he wrote in his testimony, which was delivered to the House Defense Appropriations subcommittee on April 5.
One of the greatest dangers of this high-speed nuclear-capable delivery vehicle is that it could destroy American defenses, including in space, before we had time to react adequately. That puts all major American weapons systems, which tend to be thoroughly technological and interdependent upon each other, at high risk of defeat at their weakest link.
According to Richard, all Pentagon operational plans and “every other capability we have, rests on the assumption that strategic deterrence, and in particular nuclear deterrence, will hold.”
Now that Beijing and Moscow have broken our assumption with their hypersonic capabilities, American nuclear deterrence may already have been defeated. We’re just waiting for the other shoe to drop.
It’s not a spiral of insecurity, but the dictators are backing the democracies up a spiral staircase to choose between the suicide of their sovereignty or a catastrophic war they do not want to fight.
Yet the Biden administration is canceling American development of the tactical nuclear weapons necessary, according to one defense analyst, for deterring Russia and China at the regional level.
Richard Fisher, a senior fellow at the International Assessment and Strategy Center in Washington, wrote in an email that canceling the SLCM-N “is a serious mistake that will only serve to increase the chances of aggression against the United States and its allies.”
Fisher said that SLCM-N would have given “the United States a near-term survivable tactical nuclear deterrent–that does not require the often difficult approval of allies for basing—with which it can help convince Russia and China not to initiate the use of tactical nuclear weapons.”
Without a robust tactical nuclear option, the United States would be forced to back down given Russian or Chinese use of tactical nuclear weapons or escalate to the strategic level and risk retaliation against U.S. cities.
“Today Russia has 2,000 or many more theater nuclear weapons and China likely has more than 1,000 whereas the United States reportedly only has about 500 tactical nuclear bombs and only deploys 100 of these in Europe and none in Asia,” wrote Fisher.
The Biden administration is doing something to improve America’s nuclear arsenal, though not enough. It requested a record $813 billion in defense spending for 2023, which eclipses the former president’s. Some of this will be spent on modernizing the nuclear triad, which is composed of America’s nuclear weapons deployed on bombers, submarines, and land-based missiles, but not for the SLCM-N.
In 2010, then-President Obama preceded Biden in scrapping the nuclear cruise missile, only briefly revived by President Donald Trump.
However nice a concept, the pacifist approach to nuclear strategy didn’t work. Instead, it gave Russia and China a head-start on hypersonic missile development and the rapid buildup of their conventional military and nuclear forces, much of which is meant for offense rather than defense.
If America did ever fully disarm its nuclear arsenal, there is no guarantee that Moscow and Beijing would do the same, even if they promised otherwise. If they did, their larger conventional military power and China’s massive population could then overwhelm American military forces, with no American nuclear deterrent available.
There is no risk-free solution to the threats above. Risks and costs abound whatever path is chosen because those risks and costs are imposed on America by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its allies, who respond to the olive branches of democracy with daggers hidden behind dictatorial backs. Appearing soft may be riskier than getting tougher.
America should beware of thinking that by being nicer, the CCP will somehow back off. It won’t. It will take niceness as a sign of weakness and advance on our positions globally, starting with the weakest of democracies, like Ukraine and Taiwan, that we left out in the cold from our alliances.
Beijing has a goal of global hegemony and a set of sophisticated strategies to achieve this, including using tactical nuclear weapons to scare us into a fatal paralysis when we should be ever more active in our defense. Biden needs to return America to its only successful strategy against the world’s most ruthless dictators: peace through strength.