The Stimson Center May 14, 2015 Barry Blechman and Russell Rumbaugh– “Nuclear weapons remain the most potent destructive force known to humanity. Yet, US nuclear policies and doctrines remain encumbered by Cold War beliefs in the potential utility of nuclear weapons, even though the United States enjoys a dominant geopolitical position in the world, underpinned by a conventional military superiority greater than any ever known before. These false hopes that nuclear weapons can play a range of political and military roles in US security policy cause the United States to mistakenly pursue a nuclear strategy that is costly — not only in material terms, but also in geopolitical terms. In the worst case scenarios, this strategy could be catastrophic in terms of human lives and the nation’s future. The overarching goal of US nuclear policy and strategy should be to seek to minimize the roles played by these weapons, both in our own policies and in the policies of all other nations. The United States enjoys conventional military superiority over every other nation in the world. As a result, in all situations in which military instruments are relevant means of defending American interests, conventional armed forces are the preferred means of protecting those interests. For the United States, the only role of nuclear weapons is to deter nuclear attacks on the US and its allies. These weapons provide no military or political advantage for the United States against any other threat. In addition, any use of nuclear weapons, no matter how limited, would end the longstanding taboo on their use and make devastating nuclear wars more likely. Consequently, US political and military strategy, diplomacy, military doctrine, and military force structure should all aim to minimize the importance accorded to nuclear weapons by the US and all other nations. To demonstrate why US interests would be served best by a policy of minimizing perceptions of the utility of nuclear weapons, we first examine current US conventional military superiority and the likelihood that it can be maintained well into the future. Next, we consider what military or political advantages the United States could gain from nuclear weapons — beyond deterring nuclear attacks by others. We then consider the nuclear policy that would best serve US interests. To summarize, we argue that US nuclear policy should state clearly that US nuclear weapons serve only to deter others’ use of nuclear weapons against the United States and its allies. Furthermore, the US should: a) as political circumstances make possible, pursue negotiated measures that could lead eventually to a verifiable international regime to eliminate all nuclear weapons from all nations; b) adopt declaratory policies and pursue diplomatic arrangements that strengthen the nuclear taboo; and c) focus its force structure solely on maintaining a secure, second-strike capability. We provide a detailed description of this force structure and, finally, consider how specific contingencies would affect both the policy and force structure we advocate.”