When the Commander of NATO
says he is a fan of flexible first strike at the same time that NATO is flexing
its military muscle on Russia’s border, the risk of inadvertent nuclear war is
real.
US Air Force Gen. Tod D
Wolters told the Senate this week he “is
a fan of flexible first strike” regarding NATO’s nuclear weapons,
thereby exposing the fatal fallacy of the alliance’s embrace of American
nuclear deterrence policy.
It was one of the most remarkable yet underreported exchanges in recent
Senate history. Earlier this week, during the testimony before the Senate Armed
Services Committee of General Tod Wolters, the commander of US European Command
and, concurrently, as the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe (SACEUR) also the
military head of all NATO armed forces, General Wolters engaged in a short yet
informative exchange with Senator Deb Fischer, a Republican from the state of
Nebraska.
Following some initial questions and answers focused on the
alignment of NATO’s military strategy with the 2018 National Defense Strategy
of the US, which codified what Wolters called “the malign influence on behalf of Russia” toward
European security, Senator Fischer asked about the growing recognition on the
part of NATO of the important role of US nuclear deterrence in keeping the
peace. “We all understand that our
deterrent, the TRIAD, is the bedrock of the security of this country,”
Fischer noted. “Can you
tell us about what you are hearing…from our NATO partners about this deterrent?”
Wolters responded by linking
the deterrence provided to Europe by the US nuclear TRIAD with the peace
enjoyed on the European continent over the past seven decades. Fischer asked if
the US nuclear umbrella was “vital
in the freedom of NATO members”; Wolters agreed. Remarkably,
Wolters linked the role of nuclear deterrence with the NATO missions in Iraq,
Afghanistan and elsewhere outside the European continent. NATO’s mission, he
said, was to “proliferate deterrence to the
max extent practical to achieve greater peace.”
Then came the piece de resistance of the hearing. “What are your views, Sir,”
Senator Fischer asked, “of
adopting a so-called no-first-use policy. Do you believe that that would
strengthen deterrence?”
General Wolters’ response was straight to the point. “Senator, I’m a fan of flexible
first use policy.”
Under any circumstance, the public embrace of a “flexible first strike”
policy regarding nuclear weapons employment by the Supreme Allied Commander in
Europe should generate widespread attention. When seen
in the context of the recent deployment by the US of a low-yield nuclear
warhead on submarine-launched ballistic missiles carried onboard a Trident
submarine, however, Wolters’ statement is downright explosive. Add to the mix
the fact the US recently carried out a wargame where the US Secretary of Defense
practiced the procedures for launching this very same “low yield” weapon
against a Russian target during simulated combat between Russia and NATO in
Europe, and the reaction should be off the charts. And yet there has been
deafening silence from both the European and US press on this topic.
There is, however, one party
that paid attention to what General Wolters had to say–Russia. In a statement
to the press on February 25–the same date as General Wolters’ testimony, Sergey
Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister stated that “We note with concern that Washington’s new doctrinal guidelines
considerably lower the threshold of nuclear weapons use.” Lavrov
added that this doctrine had to be viewed in the light “of the persistent deployment of
US nuclear weapons on the territory of some NATO allies and the continued
practice of the so-called joint nuclear missions.”
Rather than embracing a policy of “flexible
first strike”, Lavrov suggested that the US work with Russia to
re-confirm “the Gorbachev-Reagan formula,
which says that there can be no winners in a nuclear war and it should never be
unleashed.” This proposal was made 18 months ago, Lavrov noted, and
yet the US has failed to respond.
Complicating matters further are
the ‘Defender 2020’ NATO military exercises underway in Europe, involving tens
of thousands of US troops in one of the largest training operations since the
end of the Cold War. The fact that these exercises are taking place at a time when
the issue of US nuclear weapons and NATO’s doctrine regarding their employment
against Russia is being actively tracked by senior Russian authorities only
highlights the danger posed.
On February 6, General Valery
Gerasimov, the Russian Chief of Staff, met with General Wolters to discuss
‘Defender 2020’ and concurrent Russian military exercises to be held nearby to
deconflict their respective operations and avoid any unforeseen incidents. This
meeting, however, was held prior to the reports about a US/NATO nuclear wargame
targeting Russian forces going public, and prior to General Wolters’ statement
about “flexible first use” of NATO nuclear weapons.
In light of these events,
General Gerasimov met with French General Fançois Lecointre, the Chief of the
Defense Staff, to express Russia’s concerns over NATO’s military moves near the
Russian border, especially the Defender 2020 exercise which was, General
Gerasimov noted, “held on the basis of anti-Russian scenarios and envisage
training for offensive operations.”
General Gerasimov’s concerns cannot be viewed in isolation, but
rather must be considered in the overall historical context of NATO-Russian
relations. Back in 1983, the then-Soviet Union was extremely concerned about a series
of realistic NATO exercises, known as ‘Able Archer ‘83,’ which in many ways
mimicked the modern-day Defender 2020 in both scope and scale. Like Defender
2020, Able Archer ‘83 saw the deployment of tens of thousands of US forces into
Europe, where they assumed an offensive posture, before transitioning into a
command post exercise involving the employment of NATO nuclear weapons against
a Soviet target.
So concerned was Moscow about
these exercises, and the possibility that NATO might use them as a cover for an
attack against Soviet forces in East Germany, that the Soviet nuclear forces
were placed on high alert. Historians have since observed that the threat of
nuclear war between the US and the USSR was at that time the highest it had
been since the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962.
US and NATO officials would do well to recall the danger to European
and world security posed by the “Able Archer ‘83” exercise and the potential
for Soviet miscalculations when assessing the concerns expressed by General
Gerasimov today. The unprecedented concentration of offensive NATO military
power on Russia’s border, coupled with the cavalier public embrace by General
Wolters of a “flexible first strike” nuclear posture by NATO, has more than
replicated the threat model presented by Able Archer ’83. In this context, it
would not be a stretch to conclude that the threat of nuclear war between the
US and Russia is the highest it has been since Able Archer ’83.
The statements, views and
opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily represent those of RT.
Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer. He
served in the Soviet Union as an inspector implementing the INF Treaty, in
General Schwarzkopf’s staff during the Gulf War, and from 1991-1998 as a UN
weapons inspector. Follow him on Twitter @RealScottRitter
Copyright © Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV-Novosti”
https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/03/no_author/the-threat-of-a-nuclear-war-between-the-us-and-russia-is-now-at-its-greatest-since-1983/
Copyright © Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV-Novosti”
