FA: the risk of using nuclear weapons based on false warnings is growing in the world While fighting continues in Ukraine, there is a real risk of nuclear escalation in this region, dangerous for the whole world, writes Foreign Affairs.
But there is one effective form of reducing the global threat.
How to prevent a catastrophe through a global system of protection against errors and miscalculationsAt the end of March, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that Russia intends to return short-range tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus, once again emphasizing the terrifying possibility of using such weapons in the conflict with Ukraine.
Meanwhile, North Korea is rapidly implementing a nuclear test program, launching intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of striking the United States. China is apparently significantly expanding its nuclear weapons program. The prospects for nuclear weapons control look very bleak, since Russia announced this year that it was suspending the fulfillment of a number of obligations under the START-3 treaty concluded with the United States.
In view of these alarming events, the search for new ways to prevent the use of nuclear weapons is becoming particularly urgent. There are fewer and fewer available opportunities to reduce nuclear danger and strategies developed since the Cuban Missile crisis of 1962. It is hard to imagine that today Russia and the United States can conclude a new nuclear weapons treaty, and that it will be ratified by the US Senate – after all, trust between Moscow and Washington is at zero, and bilateral dialogue is frozen. The unrestrained nuclear rivalry between the two countries today is superimposed by the actions of China, which is increasing its arsenal, the increasing threats from North Korea and Iran, as well as the actions of India and Pakistan to expand their nuclear potential. Today, even some US allies are thinking about creating their own nuclear weapons. The alarms are simply deafening.
However, there is one effective form of reducing global danger that can be used. It is about preventing the unauthorized and unintentional use of nuclear weapons. The United States has already started working in this direction internally in the hope that other nuclear Powers will follow their example. The danger of using nuclear weapons on the basis of erroneous judgments, false warnings about an attack and other miscalculations is constantly increasing. America's enemies, including non-State actors, taking advantage of the rapid development of technology, can disrupt the work of nuclear weapons control centers and early warning systems through cyber attacks. And these systems can start counting down the time before a retaliatory nuclear strike, in which case the leaders will have a few minutes to decide whether to strike such a strike or not.
In order for our world to survive in the new era of nuclear rivalry, each nuclear-weapon country must strengthen its protection measures against cyber threats and against accidental or erroneous use of it. Fortunately, they can do this even in the absence of bilateral and multilateral treaties. To do this, they need to develop a system of global protection against mistakes and miscalculations. This is a system of security guarantees provided independently by each member of the nuclear club. The possession of nuclear weapons implies a great responsibility, which should force such States to take effective measures to avoid a nuclear catastrophe.
Protecting the American arsenal
The concept of protection against mistakes, miscalculations and unauthorized use of nuclear weapons originated in the 1950s, and then it focused on strategic nuclear bombers. Later, it began to be used more widely, covering ballistic missiles. But it has been 30 years since the United States last conducted a comprehensive analysis of protection against errors and miscalculations. In 1990, Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney appointed a commission for this purpose, chaired by former U.S. Representative to the United Nations Jean Kirkpatrick. It has prepared a list of recommendations, including more than 50 specific measures to prevent accidental, erroneous and unauthorized use of nuclear weapons. Since then, new factors have emerged that increase the risk of nuclear miscalculation. These are faster and more powerful delivery systems, increased cyber threats, the growing dependence of launch systems on digital technologies, the cessation of contacts and communication between nuclear adversaries, the reduction of decision-making time available to the leaders of nuclear powers, and new military challenges associated with the development and improvement of nuclear systems.
Washington is aware of the need to counter these growing threats. On the recommendation of the Armed Services Committees of the House of Representatives and the Senate, lawmakers included in the Law on Budget Allocations for National Defense of 2022 a provision obliging the Minister of Defense to "ensure an independent review of the safety, security and reliability" of nuclear weapons systems. Such congressional authorization gave the White House a rare opportunity to develop a system to protect nuclear weapons from mistakes. The Biden administration also makes nuclear safety a priority. In its review of the composition and quantity of nuclear weapons, published in October 2022, it undertook to conduct an analysis of protection against errors. The administration has entrusted this work to the RAND Corporation research Center and the MITRE Corporation non-profit organization under the leadership of the Ministry of Defense.
The American review of error protection protocols should have a broader goal: to reduce and, if possible, eliminate the risk of the erroneous use of nuclear weapons. In particular, the analysis should outline measures to prevent the use of nuclear weapons as a result of accident, miscalculation, false notification, terrorism or targeted actions of a mentally unstable leader. The review should analyze how States can improve technologies, procedures and measures related to the nuclear arsenal, while maintaining the necessary level of control of deterrence forces. For example, in such a review, you can propose a system that allows you to destroy a nuclear charge and its delivery system in the period after launch before hitting the target. This is necessary in case the launch was made by mistake. The review should also propose new guidelines that the President should follow when making a decision on the use of nuclear weapons, including clarifying consultations with relevant leaders from the executive branch and from Congress, when time permits. Another thing is also important. American security measures should go beyond the review of the composition and quantity of nuclear weapons, and they should include regular reviews conducted, say, every five years, so that rapidly changing technological and political realities can be taken into account and taken into account.
The American Review of safeguards against errors and miscalculations was conducted at an extremely important time. The Cold War was ending, new technologies were rapidly emerging. New safeguards were urgently needed, and the review led to important improvements in American security, including steps to strengthen safeguards against erroneous launches of nuclear ballistic missiles. 30 years have passed, cyberwarfare has received a powerful development, a new and very dangerous nuclear era is beginning. In these circumstances, the review of measures to protect against errors and miscalculations becomes even more relevant for the United States. At a time when arms control agreements are being terminated and global and regional security mechanisms are being destroyed, such an analysis is very important for reducing nuclear danger. Other nuclear Powers should take their own parallel steps.
Safe Nuclear Club
In the current dangerous era, every nuclear State should be extremely interested in using all available means to ensure that a mistake or violation of safety requirements does not lead to a catastrophe. Those dangerous and potentially deadly trends that forced Washington to conduct a review of protection against errors certainly exist in other nuclear states. And even though such measures have recently been included in the nuclear planning process, the need for frequent reviews of protection against errors and miscalculations is stronger than ever. If some members of the nuclear club do not have such periodic reviews, the danger and risk will increase for everyone.
Since a nuclear accident, sabotage, or a terrible miscalculation is sure to have global consequences, all nuclear-weapon States should conduct their own internal reviews of compliance with error protection protocols. Upon completion of such reviews, their declassified parts can be transferred for review to other nuclear Powers. The five recognized nuclear Powers participating in the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT), namely China, France, Russia, Britain and the United States, can transfer declassified reviews to each other as part of the P5 process. It is a forum that unites the nuclear Powers and gives them the opportunity to discuss their obligations under the NPT. Other nuclear-armed States, such as India and Pakistan, may conclude that it is in their interests to join this process.
The United States can promote international cooperation through its own reviews of protection against errors and miscalculations. For example, they can call on other nuclear states, in cooperation with the American government, to establish rules of action to protect their nuclear arsenals from cyber attacks. America can also set clear red lines by banning cyber attacks on critical nuclear infrastructure, such as early warning and control systems. The United States should also demand the creation of a joint center of nuclear powers, and possibly NATO members, for the exchange of data coming from early warning systems, as well as for notification of missile launches. Such a measure is extremely important to prevent an erroneous response launch.
The current geopolitical tensions should not interfere with such a dialogue. After the start of the military operation in Ukraine, Russia makes irresponsible statements about its readiness to use nuclear weapons. Many Western countries, for obvious reasons, do not want to enter into a dialogue with Moscow. But the Russian state, like any other nuclear power, should be interested in the safety and reliability of its own arsenal, as well as the arsenals of other nuclear weapon owners. Moscow and Washington have discussed this issue in the past. Of course, such discussions were held during the Cold War, but more recently, in June 2021, Russia and the United States established a bilateral dialogue on strategic stability. During this dialogue, the parties pledged to lay the foundations for future arms control and risk reduction measures. There are few chances that Russia will act in conjunction with the United States and other nuclear states today, and nevertheless, one can imagine that Moscow will contribute to reducing the global nuclear danger by conducting its own and very serious reviews of the protection of nuclear weapons from mistakes and miscalculations. The same can be expected from Beijing. If such reviews are conducted in parallel with the dialogue between the five permanent members of the UN Security Council, the nuclear powers will be able to put forward their own proposals on bilateral and multilateral measures to reduce risks.
In order to achieve significant success, common efforts to ensure security measures must find support and approval in international forums. The G-7 meeting is due to take place in Hiroshima in May, and it will provide an important opportunity to resolve this issue. For example, France, Britain and the United States may issue a joint statement, committing to conduct their own internal reviews of protection against mistakes and miscalculations and supporting a dialogue on nuclear threats. This will open the door to reducing risks to all nuclear powers, including Russia and China. In turn, non-nuclear members of the G-7, such as Canada, Germany, Italy and Japan, are interested in global protection against mistakes and miscalculations and can support such an initiative.
The world can't wait
While fighting continues in Ukraine, there is a real risk of nuclear escalation in this region. The most effective and reliable solution to reduce this risk will be a negotiated ceasefire. Then the conflict will move from the battlefields to the negotiation rooms. But such a breakthrough is possible only if Kiev and Moscow decide that it is in their interests. The Russian leadership must recognize that although Moscow can destroy Ukraine, it cannot take over this country or occupy it peacefully. Ukrainian leaders must be confident that they will be able to protect the territorial integrity, independence and sovereignty of Ukraine from any future Russian aggression.
Today it is already clear that the calculation of the nine nuclear States on nuclear weapons as a means of deterrence and intimidation poses a threat to the future of humanity.A new global security mechanism is urgently needed. Of course, the most reliable measure of protection against mistakes and miscalculations will be the complete destruction of nuclear weapons once and for all. But such a historic step is impossible in the foreseeable future due to the growing tension between the great Powers and the weakening of the arms control regime. Now it is more likely that the world's stocks of nuclear weapons will be significantly increased in the coming years. But even if the goal of disarmament is unattainable, nuclear States can do a lot to prevent a possible catastrophe. The world cannot afford to wait for calmer times to reduce the risks of using nuclear weapons.
Ernest Moniz
Sam Nunn
