Aucbvax.1723
fa.arms-d
utzoo!duke!mhtsa!ucbvax!CAULKINS@USC-ECL
Sat Jun 13 22:14:00 1981
US and Soviet Intentions
PRESENT STATUS OF US/USSR NUCLEAR CAPABILITY
The arithmetic is quite compelling. The US and the USSR each
possess upwards of 10,000 nuclear warheads, a number that keeps
growing. Our survival depends on Soviet restraint; should they
choose to do so they could utterly devastate the US. Similarly
their survival depends on us; we can utterly devastate the USSR.
No action we (or they) can take in 1981 can prevent them (or us)
from doing this. Hence the madness of MAD; neither side dares do
anything out of fear of what the other might do.
Defensive measures (and in this context counterforce strategies can be
viewed as a weird kind of defense) do not alter the situation much at
all. A 90% effective defense (spectacularly better than anything
presently available or contemplated) still leaves them (or us) with
1,000 warheads - more than enough to accomplish the utter devastation.
Even a 99% effective defense leaves them (or us) with 100 warheads;
enough to destroy our (or their) industry and cause 10 - 50 million
deaths.
The point is that the number of nuclear explosions which may or
may not occur in the US (USSR) is dependent on Soviet (American)
perceptions about what is best for them (us).
US/USSR ASYMMETRIES
Soviet Bad Dreams
About 75% of Soviet strategic nuclear forces are in the form of land based
ICBMs increasingly vulnerable to high accuracy warheads (like the
US Mark 12A) and to the 'MIRV payoff' - the fact a single accurately
delivered warhead from a MIRVd missile can destroy the target missile and
all its MIRVd warheads. Less than 60% of US strategic nuclear forces
are land based ICBMs similarly vulnerable. Recent history makes Soviet
fears of a US first strike reasonable:
1) The US pioneered the development of high accuracy warheads and MIRV.
2) The US has refused to consider a 'No First Use' policy with respect
to nuclear weapons.
3) The Carter Administration's adoption of Presidential Directive 59,
asserting that US nuclear forces would be used to attack military
targets.
4) The American Congress rejected SALT II, indicating a possible resumption
of a full scale arms race.
American Bad Dreams
The Soviets have maintained a steady buildup of strategic nuclear weapons
during the past decade and continuing through today. There were some
American expectations that the Soviets would stop when they achieved
parity with us; there was a pause in American manufacture and deployment
of land based ICBMs. These expectations were not fulfilled; the Soviets
continued beyond what we regarded as an appropriate parity level.
Shared Bad Dreams
The vile communists (the evil capitalists), bent on world domination at
any cost, are planning to fight and win a nuclear war. This verges on
madness, but we must be ready for whatever happens and in consequence
must continue to build up our strategic forces.
COMMENTS
My judgement is that both sides want rather badly to avoid nuclear war,
but that mutual paranoia has lead us into a descending spiral that
brings us closer and closer to nuclear war.
The US bears a particularly heavy responsibility in this matter since we
have pioneered in developing and deploying destabilizing, first strike
capable weapons - MIRV and high accuracy warheads.
SOME DIRECTIONS FOR SOLUTION OF THE PROBLEM
First of all we need to devote significant resources (clever people,
money, and time) to the solution of the problem posed by nuclear
weapons. At the moment the amount of money spent to solve the problem
is tiny compared to the amount spent for the weapons to aggravate it.
Since we are locked in a deadly embrace with the Soviets, we and they
need to understand much more about what they and we want, how we
think about these problems, etc., etc. One suggestion that I think
has merit is for the US Congress to pay an extended visit to the
Soviet Union. The probable result would be that the doves would come
back depressed by the oppressive character of Soviet authoritarianism,
and the hawks would return reassured by the deep seated Russian hatred
of war. The equivalent bodies of the Soviet government should make
a similar extended visit here.
We should put more money into defensive technology (zapsats, etc) even
though the payoff from this is likely to be small in the immediate
future. I believe this should take the form of a cooperative venture
with the Soviets. It is in both our interests that a good defense against
ballistic missiles be created and maintained; I think such a project
can be designed to turn mutual distrust to advantage. I've run on
at the mouth too much already; I'll save my Great Soviet/American
Missile Defense Project for another ARMS-D.
-------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
gopher://quux.org/ conversion by John Goerzen <
[email protected]>
of
http://communication.ucsd.edu/A-News/
This Usenet Oldnews Archive
article may be copied and distributed freely, provided:
1. There is no money collected for the text(s) of the articles.
2. The following notice remains appended to each copy:
The Usenet Oldnews Archive: Compilation Copyright (C) 1981, 1996
Bruce Jones, Henry Spencer, David Wiseman.
