The Blog

Hagel’s Support for U.S. Nuclear Disarmament: Why the Senate Should Care

12:50 PM, Jan 17, 2013 • By ROBERT ZARATE
Widget tooltip
Single Page Print Larger Text Smaller Text Alerts

Former senator Chuck Hagel, President Obama’s nominee to be the next secretary of defense, has drawn sharp criticism for championing even deeper cuts to military spending, making statements hostile or indifferent to Israel, denigrating pro-Israel groups in the United States as “the Jewish lobby,” and objecting to the potential use of military force to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran. Another issue that deserves close and careful scrutiny by senators and their staffers, however, is Hagel’s advocacy for global nuclear disarmament—and, toward that end, drastic cuts to the U.S. nuclear arsenal. 

Hagel Chuck

For nearly 70 years, America’s nuclear forces have provided the nation with the ultimate insurance policy against major military aggression by foreign powers. Moreover, the U.S. nuclear deterrent has played a direct and undeniable role in dampening the destabilizing proliferation of nuclear weapons—in particular, by empowering the United States to extend a “nuclear umbrella” of shared security over allies who might otherwise feel compelled to build their own nuclear arms.

The problem, however, is that the U.S. nuclear arsenal is growing old. It will need sustained investments over the long term—not only to keep extending the service lives of aging nuclear warheads in the absence of actual testing, but also to begin replacing the bomber aircraft, the land-based long-range missiles, and the submarine-launched missiles that comprise the nuclear deterrent’s fleet of delivery vehicles.

In return for Senate support for a treaty to reduce American and Russian nuclear arms, President Obama promised Congress in 2010 that he would advance and completely fund programs to modernize the U.S. nuclear arsenal. Since then, lawmakers in the Senate and the House have repeatedly criticized the commander in chief—who, during a high-profile Prague speech in April 2009, had famously announced his goal of eventually achieving “a world without nuclear weapons”—for subsequently failing to fully live up to his promise.

Enter Chuck Hagel—who, after leaving the U.S. Senate in 2009, aligned himself with Global Zero, an international movement agitating for “the elimination of all nuclear weapons,” and also joined the board of directors of the Ploughshares Fund, an organization that funds research to promote nuclear disarmament and arms control.

Hagel now stands within reach of becoming the highest-ranking civilian official in the Pentagon, responsible for America’s conventional and nuclear military forces. Yet it was only in May 2012 that he co-authored a controversial report for Global Zero that urges deep cuts to America’s nuclear forces—by unilateral means, if necessary—on the path to global nuclear disarmament.

In particular, the Global Zero report co-authored by Hagel urges the United States not only to cut down to 900 total strategic nuclear warheads—only 450 of which would be actually deployed—but also to:

·        Entirely eliminate land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs).  The U.S. Air Force currently deploys a total of 450 “Minuteman III” ICBM missiles at three locations—at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Montana, represented by Democratic senators Max Baucus and Jon Tester; at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, represented by Republican senator John Hoeven and Democratic senator Heidi Heitkamp; and at F. E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming, represented by Republican senators John Barrasso and Michael Enzi.

Recent Blog Posts

The Weekly Standard Archives

Browse 19 Years of the Weekly Standard

Old covers