Nuclear Bomber Signaling Doesn’t Work
http://breakingdefense.com/2016/03/nuclear-bomber-signaling-doesnt-work/
Nuclear Bomber Signaling Doesnt Work
By Jim Doyle on March 21, 2016 at 4:01 AM
In a recent article in Breaking Defense, Adam Lowther and Chris Winklepleck argue that the strategic aircraft leg of the triad provides unique nuclear signaling capabilities essential to demonstrating the seriousness of U.S. nuclear threats. But the benefit of using nuclear weapons in this manner is a dubious one, both for America and its allies.
Lowther and Winklepleck claim nuclear flyovers of South Korea in 2013 and 2016 by U.S. B-2 and B-52 aircraft illustrate the value of this nuclear signaling with the bomber leg of the nuclear triad.
They are wrong. This aerial flexing of nuclear muscle has done nothing to ease tension on the Korean peninsula or improve North Koreas behavior. It has raised tensions and provided domestic justification for Pyongyangs dictatorship, brinkmanship and nuclear weapons program by confirming the existence of an external nuclear threat from the United States. This threat has been claimed by the Democratic Peoples Republic of North Korea (DPRK) since the Korean War, when the United States threatened to use nuclear weapons against it.
~snip~
In the majority of situations, including the cases of North Korea, Russia and Chinas assertiveness in the South China Sea, sending signals with U.S. nuclear forces are apt to increase tensions, reduce stability and risk unintended escalation. These outcomes can make the chances of conflict more likely; the exact opposite of what is intended. It is better to respond to nuclear saber rattling by potential adversaries by providing diplomatic reassurance to our allies, as well as conventional military assistance that provides them with the means to counter aggression. Nuclear weapons should be kept in the background. They are weapons of last resort and should only be brandished when the very existence of the United States and its allies is threatened.