New threats, old weapons

In Tuesday’s Washington Post, Robert R. Monroe notes: "In the 13 years since the Cold War ended, the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal…has become increasingly ill-suited to deterring the more diversified – but still deadly – threats that face us. Deterring rogue states and terrorist groups from using weapons of mass destruction is still possible, but only if we modernize our nuclear forces."

Monroe’s analysis is particularly timely in light of two recent events. On Wednesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced that his country is researching and testing new nuclear missile systems "of the kind that other nuclear powers do not and will not have" – an effort clearly aimed at neutralizing America’s developing ballistic missile shield.

Even more disturbingly, an Iranian opposition group revealed that Tehran had obtained weapons-grade uranium along with a design for a nuclear bomb from a Pakistani scientist, and was covertly enriching uranium at a previously unknown military facility, despite an agreement (one that, not surprisingly, Iranian President Mohammad Khatami claimed as "a great victory") reached with European negotiators earlier this week requiring the Islamic Republic to eschew such activity. This revelation makes it apparent that the rogue state has no intention of forgoing a nuclear arsenal.

Both events buttress Monroe’s recommendation that "in a dangerous world, with many states and organizations committed to acquiring and using nuclear weapons, it would be unwise for the United States not to make our nuclear deterrent force more effective." Let us hope that American policy-makers heed his advice.