photo
SHARE | PRINT | TEXT SIZE: ＋ － | RSS

Confronting a Common Threat

By Sam Nunn

Sam Nunn is co-chairman and chief executive officer of the Nuclear Threat Initiative. He served in the U.S. Senate from 1972-1997 and was chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee. This article is taken from his statement to the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Nuclear Weapons Policy on March 29, 2007.

In 1948, at the dawn of the nuclear age, General Omar Bradley said, "The world has achieved brilliance without wisdom, power without conscience. Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants. We know more about war than we know about peace, more about killing than we know about living."

If he were alive today, it might surprise General Bradley to know that we have made it 62 years since Hiroshima and Nagasaki without the use of a nuclear weapon. But that fact should not give us a false sense of confidence that we will make it the next 62, or even the next 20 years.

We have important efforts underway and some successes, but from my perspective, the risk of a nuclear weapon being used today is growing, not receding.

The good news is that the potential for conflict between the major powers, and in particular between the United States and Russia, has dramatically declined. Though both countries seem reluctant to act on it, we share many security concerns. The bad news is that there still remains a potentially deadly nuclear threat: both countries still deploy thousands of nuclear warheads on ballistic missiles that can hit their targets in less than 30 minutes--a short warning time, "hair-trigger" prompt launch capability that increases the risk of an accidental, mistaken or unauthorized nuclear missile launch.

Mindful of today's rising threats and the eroding confidence in deterrence as we have known it, George Shultz, Bill Perry, Henry Kissinger and I published an article in January in The Wall Street Journal ["A World Free of Nuclear Weapons"]. We believe that we have arrived at a dangerous tipping point in the nuclear era, and we advocate a strategy for improving American security and global security.

Whether the world recognizes it or not--we are in a race between cooperation and catastrophe.

Those of us who wrote and endorsed The Wall Street Journal piece believe that in order to deal effectively with this new and dangerous era, the United States and the international community must embrace the vision of a world free of nuclear weapons and pursue crucial measures toward achieving that goal. We believe that without the bold vision, the actions will not be perceived as fair or urgent. Without the actions, the vision will not be perceived as realistic or possible.

We recommend several specific steps for action, among them:

  • We must secure nuclear weapons and materials around the world to the highest standard;
  • We should eliminate short-range "tactical" nuclear weapons, the bombs most likely to be targeted for theft or purchase by terrorists;
  • We must get control of the uranium enrichment process for civil nuclear fuel production, halt the production of fissile material for weapons and phase out the use of highly enriched uranium in civil commerce;
  • The United States and Russia should move to change the Cold War posture of their deployed nuclear weapons to greatly increase warning time in both countries and ease our fingers away from the nuclear trigger.

Nearly 20 years ago, Ronald Reagan was asked to identify the most pressing need in international relations. In response, President Reagan asked his audience to imagine that "all of us discovered that we were threatened by a power from outer space--from another planet." The President then asked: "Wouldn't we come together to fight that particular threat?" After letting that image sink in for a moment, President Reagan came to his point: "We now have a weapon that can destroy the world--why don't we recognize that threat more clearly and then come together with one aim in mind: How safely, sanely and quickly can we rid the world of this threat to our civilization and our existence?"

If we want a safer world for our children and grandchildren, our generation must answer President Reagan's question.

TOP