Advertising
Supported by
A former national security adviser says Washington “needs to test new nuclear weapons to determine their real-world reliability and security,” while critics say the move could simply incite a global arms race that increases the threat of war.
By William J. Broad
William J. Broad recently reported on progress at China’s nuclear weapons site.
Donald J. Trump’s allies are proposing that the United States resume nuclear weapons tests through underground detonations if the former president is re-elected in November. Several nuclear experts reject such a resumption and say it would threaten to end a moratorium on testing. that the world’s major nuclear powers have had reputations for decades.
In Foreign Affairs magazine’s lacheck factor, Robert Co’Brien, Trump’s former national security adviser, urges him to conduct nuclear controls if he wins any other terms. Washington, he writes, “must test the reliability and protection of new nuclear weapons in the real world for the first time since 1992. “This, he added, would allow the United States to “maintain its technical and numerical superiority over the combined nuclear arsenals of China and Russia. “
At the end of the Cold War in 1992, the United States renounced nuclear explosive testing and convinced other nuclear powers to do the same. Instead, the U. S. turned to experts and machines in the country’s weapons labs to determine the lethality of its arsenal. Today, machines come with room-sized supercomputers, the world’s toughest X-ray machine, and a formula of lasers the length of a sports stadium.
In his article, O’Brien describes these paintings simply as “the use of computer models. “Republican members of Congress and some nuclear experts have deemed non-explosive tests inadequate to assure the U. S. military of the status quo that its arsenal works, and have called for actual tests.
But Biden’s leadership and other Democrats warn that a U. S. check could simply lead to a chain reaction of checks conducted across other countries. Over time, they add, the recovery could simply lead to a nuclear arms race that would destabilize the global balance of terrorism. and increase the threat of war.
“It’s a terrible idea,” said Ernest J. Moniz, who oversaw the U. S. nuclear arsenal as secretary of power in the Obama administration. “New tests would make us less safe. That is separated from the global repercussions.
We are recovering the content of the article.
Please allow javascript in your browser settings.
Thank you for your patience as we determine access. If you’re in Reader mode, log out and log in to your Times account or subscribe to the full Times.
Thank you for your patience as we determine access.
Already a subscriber? Sign in.
Do you want all the Times? Subscribe.
Advertising