But the reasonings in the paper were unconvincing for many nuclear policy experts, who argued that a departure from previous constructive nuclear policies may trigger a new round of arms race, and that by overstating security risks the Pentagon is proposing a solution to a non-existing problem.
"Recent Russian statements on this evolving nuclear weapons doctrine appear to lower the threshold for Moscow's first-use of nuclear weapons", the review said. Previous administrations, both Republican and Democrat, have worked to reduce the threat of nuclear weapons, and this review breaks sharply from that bipartisan tradition.
The NPT, which came into force in 1970 and has been signed by nearly all countries including the United States, calls on nations "to achieve at the earliest possible date the cessation of the nuclear arms race and to undertake measures in the direction of nuclear disarmament".
The new U.S. posture focuses heavily on what the administration sees as an overdue modernization of the nuclear arsenal.
He accused Russia, China and North Korea of boosting their nuclear stockpiles and "raising the prominence of nuclear weapons in their security strategies".
The US military has proposed diversifying its nuclear arsenal and developing new, smaller atomic bombs, largely to counter Russian Federation.
The review sought to back up Mattis on how the US nuclear deterrent would be channeled in confronting Russian Federation and China, which are now viewed under the strategy as the main security challenges to the USA, replacing terrorism. AI decision-making is much faster than human thinking and with applications for it being used in cyber security, drones and self-driving cars; the writer and others are validated for concerns that we are already in - or we may be getting ready to enter a new Cold War.
The Trump administration's proposal to add a sea-launched cruise missile to the US nuclear arsenal, criticized by some as overkill, is meant to provide new negotiating leverage to USA diplomats trying to persuade Russian Federation to end violations of a key arms control treaty, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Tuesday.
"This is a very mainstream nuclear policy", Miller added.
The policy reaffirms a full modernization of the US nuclear force approved by President Barack Obama, which replaces the military's nuclear bombers, submarines and ICBMs at an estimated cost of $1.2 trillion over 30 years. Most of that money would go to new generations of bombers and new submarines, and a rebuilding of the land-based nuclear missile force that still dots giant fields across the West. For example, the policy calls for "the rapid development" of a cruise missile that would be fired from submarines, then become airborne before reaching its target.
Pulling out of the 1987 treaty "would allow the United States to develop and deploy short and medium-range cruise missiles against China as well as against Russia", Freeman explained. "The objective is to make clear it is not in others´ interest to use nuclear weapons".
Among the fiscal needs, according to the Congressional Budget Office, would be: (1) $313 billion for a new ballistic missile submarine capable of firing nuclear missiles from beneath the ocean surface; (2) $149 billion for a new silo-based intercontinental ballistic missile; and (3) $266 billion for a new B-21 Stealth bomber.
"It reaffirms our commitment to arms control and nuclear non-proliferation, maintains the moratorium on nuclear testing, and commits to improving efforts to prevent, detect, and respond to nuclear terrorism". They'll just increase the potential for their use and for miscalculation.