I know our political dialogue isn’t so hot right now, but here’s an idea: In the final days of the Trump presidency, let’s maybe leave nuclear weapons out of it? Flirtation with thermonuclear heat is ill-inclined to be in the nation’s better interest.
I say this in light of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s announcement on Friday that she has spoken “to the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Mark Milley to discuss available precautions for preventing an unstable president from initiating military hostilities or accessing the launch codes and ordering a nuclear strike.” A spokesperson for Milley says that the chairman simply briefed Pelosi on the nuclear command authority.
This is very silly stuff from Pelosi. In fact, it’s dangerous.
The assurance of credible nuclear deterrence isn’t simply the heart of the nation’s defense; it is the shield of the nation’s very existence. Consider the risk of China and Russia believing that the U.S. nuclear authorities are inert. While they would be highly unlikely to launch a first strike, when we’re talking about hundreds (China) or thousands (Russia) of nuclear warheads streaming down on American cities, our leaders should wish to avoid any perception of weakness. And yes, this includes the next 12 days before President-elect Joe Biden takes office. As we learned in the 13 days of the Cuban Missile Crisis, things can go wrong quickly.
Pelosi should know far better than to make these comments.
Third-in-line to the presidency, Pelosi has been given a limited briefing on the nuclear command authority. Part of the continuity of government plans, this briefing is designed to ensure that Pelosi could command the nation’s nuclear forces in the event that President Trump or Vice President Mike Pence were incapacitated. Pelosi also knows that there is good reason for the president’s unilateral nuclear command authority. Namely, the exigent national interest in situating nuclear weapons policy at the merging point of speed-of-action and credibility of delivery.
When you’re dealing with a highly opportunistic adversary such as Vladimir Putin and his nuclear forces, or a highly ambitious adversary such as Xi Jinping and his nuclear forces, broadcasting a condition of weakness or doubt isn’t sensible. This is especially relevant with Putin, who prioritizes efforts to fray U.S. and NATO’s nuclear deterrence structure. What actually makes sense is to foster foes’ sustained understanding that America’s ability to annihilate them supersedes their ability to annihilate America. This is why, for example, Strategic Command so regularly tests its doomsday protocols. That principle extends to other threat actors and must prevail whether the president is named Donald Trump or Joe Biden.
Pelosi’s comment is silly for another reason. It is pointless and obviously designed to summon the partisan furies.
The speaker recognizes that there is a near-zero chance of Trump starting a nuclear war on an insane foundation. I do not believe it is remotely credible, but let’s quickly game out Pelosi’s apparent fear of Trump’s nuclear authority.
Let’s say Trump was to open the nuclear “football” command link and direct Strategic Command to launch a nuclear attack on China because “Beijing has stolen my destiny with the China virus,” or something. What would happen? Would Adm. Charles Richard, head of Strategic Command, simply relay that message to the relevant nuclear strike platforms? No, he would not. He would delay in carrying out the order on the basis that Trump’s order was illegal. He would then reach out to acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller, and presumably the rest of the Cabinet — if necessary, raising the alarm via the media. Seeing as the Cabinet are human beings with families in Washington, D.C., and that the capital would likely be targeted with at least twenty independent warheads in the event of a Chinese or Russian nuclear retaliation, Trump would very quickly be suspended from his office under the 25th Amendment. For those more paranoid observers who suggest some officials are so subservient to Trump they would do anything for him, I would make the point that loyalty isn’t great if everyone is dead.
Put simply, the nuclear football is a very poor choice as a partisan football. The stakes for America and the world are simply too great to play games here. Trump’s recent leadership has been both disgraceful and erratic. But Pelosi should know better.
