2010 Nuclear Posture Review

2010 Nuclear Posture Review
Name	2010 Nuclear Posture Review
Date	2010
Author	Barack Obama Department of Defense
Country	United States
Type	Nuclear policy review

2010 Nuclear Posture Review was a strategic policy document issued by the Barack Obama Department of Defense in 2010 that assessed United States nuclear forces, doctrines, and planning in the context of contemporary proliferation and strategic challenges. The review connected to diplomacy with Dmitry Medvedev, Hu Jintao, Manmohan Singh, Gordon Brown, and multilateral institutions such as the United Nations and North Atlantic Treaty Organization while influencing relationships with Russia, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea.

Background and Objectives

The review followed initiatives from the Presidency of Barack Obama, including the Nobel Peace Prize speech and the arms control agenda that had intersected with the New START treaty negotiations between Barack Obama and Dmitry Medvedev, and aimed to align United States posture with commitments under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and discussions at the Nuclear Security Summit. It sought to reconcile legacy guidance from administrations of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush with operational realities facing the United States Strategic Command and planners at the Pentagon and to inform budget decisions involving the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency and National Nuclear Security Administration.

Key Findings and Policy Changes

The review argued for reduced reliance on nuclear weapons while retaining capabilities to deter threats from Russia, China, Iran, and non-state actors such as Al-Qaeda and transitional threats exemplified by crises like the 2008 Russo-Georgian War. It recommended changes to declaratory policy that addressed first-use options involving chemical weapons possessed by Syria and potential threats from proliferation states such as Iran. The document influenced New START treaty implementation, interplay with Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty debates, and coordination with allies in NATO and bilateral dialogues with leaders like Angela Merkel and Stephen Harper.

Nuclear Forces and Capabilities

The review assessed triad components including Ohio-class SSBNs, B-2 and B-52 strategic bomber forces, and land-based Minuteman III ICBMs, evaluating modernization programs such as replacement plans that touched on programs related to the Columbia-class submarine, Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, and the Long Range Strike Bomber procurement. It examined warhead stockpile stewardship overseen by the Los Alamos National Laboratory, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, and Sandia National Laboratories under the National Nuclear Security Administration, while considering command and control frameworks linked to the North American Aerospace Defense Command and strategic communications with the White House and United States Senate oversight committees.

Non-Strategic and Tactical Nuclear Weapons

The review addressed forward-deployed non-strategic weapons in Europe and arsenals associated with NATO burden-sharing, including US B61 gravity bombs and their role in NATO mission planning coordinated with capitals such as Rome, Berlin, Paris, and Warsaw. It discussed options for reducing excess non-strategic inventories and explored technical pathways for life-extension programs administered by the National Nuclear Security Administration and debated in forums including the NATO-Russia Founding Act and bilateral talks with Vladimir Putin.

Arms Control, Deterrence, and Extended Deterrence

The review linked deterrence theory as practiced by United States Strategic Command to ongoing arms control efforts like START I, New START, and multilateral processes at the Conference on Disarmament. It emphasized extended deterrence commitments to allies in Japan, South Korea, and NATO members, shaping cooperation between the Ministry of Defence and the Japan Self-Defense Forces while intersecting with diplomatic instruments such as sanctions coordinated with the European Union and contingency ties to states like Australia and Turkey.

Implementation and Budget Implications

Implementing the review affected procurement and sustainment budgets overseen by the Secretary of Defense and Congress, influencing programs at the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and investment choices for National Laboratories and defense contractors such as Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Boeing. Cost estimates tied to modernization and life-extension programs factored into debates in the United States Congress and budgetary committees, intersecting with sequestration-era concerns and defense appropriations shaped by legislators including Harry Reid and Mitch McConnell.

Reactions and Criticism

Reactions spanned endorsements from arms control advocates including leaders associated with the Federation of American Scientists and critics among hawks in the United States Senate and think tanks like the Heritage Foundation and Center for Strategic and International Studies. International responses ranged from supportive commentary in London and Ottawa to skepticism voiced in Moscow and Beijing, with analyst reports from institutions such as the Brookings Institution and RAND Corporation debating strategic sufficiency, signaling, and verification implications for treaties including the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and future negotiations at the United Nations Conference on Disarmament.

Category:United States nuclear policy