For Immediate Release
Washington, DC, Office
Phone: (202) 223-6133
Fax: (202) 223-6162
DOE Plan Reduces Nuclear Arsenal By Up to 40 Percent But Results in Few Savings or Reductions in Size of Weapons Complex
Science Groups Release Budget Plan Publicly for First Time
WASHINGTON - The Obama administration is planning to cut the U.S. nuclear arsenal
by as much as 40 percent by 2021, but also wants to spend nearly $175
billion over the next 20 years to build new facilities and maintain and
modify thousands of weapons, according to two sections of an
administration plan made public today by the Federation of
American Scientists (FAS) and the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS).
The proposal, the "FY 2011 Stockpile Stewardship and Management
Plan," which is part of the Department of Energy's proposed fiscal year
2011 budget, was drafted by DOE's National Nuclear Security
Administration (NNSA) and presented to members of Congress in May.
"Nuclear weapons are now a liability, not an asset, so the plan to
reduce the U.S. nuclear stockpile is a step in the right direction,"
said Lisbeth Gronlund, co-director of UCS's Global Security Program.
The plan calls for the United States to reduce its nuclear arsenal 30
to 40 percent from today's total of approximately 5,000 weapons.
Reductions already underway will reduce the arsenal to 4,700 weapons by
the end of 2012. According to the plan, "the future NNSA infrastructure
will support total stockpiles up to a range of approximately 3,000 to
3,500 ... warheads."
"The 3,000 to 3,500 total warhead target is a ceiling," said Hans
Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the
Federation of American Scientists. "Of course, the United States could
reduce its arsenal to even lower levels through negotiated agreements
with Russia and the other nuclear weapon states."
The plan also includes cost estimates beyond what NNSA has previously
released. It calls for the United States to spend nearly $175 billion
(in then-year dollars) from 2010 to 2030 on new weapons production,
testing and simulation facilities, and on modernizing and extending the
life of the remaining weapons in the arsenal. That price tag does not
include the cost of maintaining and operating nuclear weapons delivery
systems, which is covered by the Department of Defense budget.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Our Summer Campaign Is Underway
Support Common Dreams Today
Independent News and Views Putting People Over Profit
Given NNSA's spotty record for meeting deadlines and budgets, experts
at FAS and UCS predict that the costs likely will be higher.
"Weapons expenditures will remain high because the plan calls for
retaining a large weapons complex independent of the size of the
arsenal," said Nickolas Roth, an analyst with UCS's Global Security
Program. "This could be a problem for deeper reductions that are needed
since it would be possible for the United States to rapidly rebuild."
The two science groups also questioned some of NNSA's key
assumptions. For example, they questioned the need to maintain the
capability of supporting 3,000 to 3,500 weapons even if the number of
weapons in the stockpile dropped below 1,000.
"That calculation makes no sense," said Kristensen. "It's akin to
saying that today's stockpile of about 5,000 weapons requires a complex
of nearly the same size and cost as when the stockpile had 8,000
warheads. Given the size of the federal deficit, the Obama
administration needs to think more clearly about how it spends
Finally, the groups cautioned the Obama administration against
planning to make extensive modifications to U.S. nuclear weapons in the
future when the United States is seeking additional reductions with
Russia and other nuclear weapon states and needs the support of
non-nuclear countries to implement the administration's nonproliferation
"Not only could extensive ‘improvements'
reduce the reliability of the warheads," Gronlund said, "they would send
the wrong message when we are trying to get other countries to reduce
This is the world we live in. This is the world we cover.
Because of people like you, another world is possible. There are many battles to be won, but we will battle them together—all of us. Common Dreams is not your normal news site. We don't survive on clicks. We don't want advertising dollars. We want the world to be a better place. But we can't do it alone. It doesn't work that way. We need you. If you can help today—because every gift of every size matters—please do. Without Your Support We Won't Exist.
Please select a donation method:
The Union of Concerned Scientists is the leading science-based nonprofit working for a healthy environment and a safer world. UCS combines independent scientific research and citizen action to develop innovative, practical solutions and to secure responsible changes in government policy, corporate practices, and consumer choices.