The Washington Post:
Donald Trump has sparked a presidential debate about whether and how the United States should use weapons from its nuclear arsenal.
But behind the scenes here in Washington, Republican lawmakers are quietly planning to ramp up development of defensive weapons in a move that could change long-standing U.S. policy and rock global relationships.
It all comes down to one word — “limited” — that currently defines the type of nuclear strike the U.S. guards against by tightly controlling the number of ballistic missiles in the country’s defensive arsenal. It’s a policy focused on threats from places like Iran and North Korea.
But now Congress is planning on removing that word and potentially replacing it with a more “robust” substitute, letting the next president significantly ramp up production, modernization and development of defensive weapons aimed against bigger nuclear powers.
Proponents of the unprecedented change, led by Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) in the House and Ted Cruz (R-Texas) in the Senate, believe it is necessary to help the U.S. respond to increased threats from nations like Russia and China.
Russia has become a flashpoint of political debate on the campaign trail this year, with critics alleging that Trump and has campaign are too close to Russian President Vladimir Putin and Trump calling on Russia to hack Hillary Clinton’s email server to find 30,000 emails that were previously deleted.
But most Republicans are far more alarmed by Russia, pointing to Putin as a “gangster,” in the word of Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.), who is wreaking havoc in Syria and Ukraine, and count Russia as a key reason the U.S. must build up its military arsenal and fortify its ballistic defenses.
“During his administration, Trump will be friendly with Putin. I think it would be great,” the GOP nominee recently told CNBC.
But many experts warn the change will broadcast a dangerous geopolitical message to U.S. rivals, who may use it to justify building up offensive ballistic missile capacity, potentially putting nuclear arms control treaties in jeopardy.
“The calculus of the nuclear arms race is that if one side builds up defenses, the other side builds up offensive systems to overwhelm those defenses,” said Joe Cirincione, a nuclear security expert and president of the Ploughshares Fund. “We are on the verge of repeating the Cold War errors we escaped.”
The “limited” language is being contemplated as part of the annual defense policy bill, the final draft of which is being negotiated. Yet there is consensus between the House and Senate that the existing standard should change: the Senate-passed bill strikes the word “limited,” while the House-passed bill states U.S. policy should be to “maintain and improve a robust, layered missile defense system” to guard against “the developing and increasingly complex ballistic missile threat.”
