By
The Associated Press
WASHINGTON - President Bush favors deep cuts in U.S. nuclear weapons to persuade Russia and others that missile defense, not offense, is the way to deal with the most dangerous threats of the 21st century.
Bush is scheduled to outline his approach to nuclear offense and defense in a speech today at the National Defense University, exactly eight months after then-President Clinton announced he would not move ahead with deploying a missile defense. Clinton said the technology was not ready.
Bush has often said he would like to reduce the nuclear arsenal to the lowest level possible while still maintaining enough weaponry to deter an aggressor, but he has not said exactly how low he would go.
Rose Gottemoeller, a foreign and security policy expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, said yesterday the administration may be considering eliminating the nuclear mission for Air Force bombers like the B-2 and the B-52. It also is possible that Bush's expected reductions could lead to a reduced nuclear role for the Navy's Trident submarines or for the Air Force's intercontinental ballistic missile force. Bush is not expected to provide such details in his speech today.
The president also has indicated he would take some U.S. nuclear forces off high alert.
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declined yesterday to provide specifics of Bush's speech, but he stressed that the president believes the key threat to the United States and its allies is from a small-scale nuclear attack, not the all-out nuclear assault that was feared during the Cold War.
"It's a totally different world," Fleischer said, adding that the president will unveil "new thinking about how to protect the American people and our allies from missile threats."
Bush discussed this in telephone calls yesterday to German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, French President Jacques Chirac, Canadian Prime Minister Jean Chretien and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, as well as Lord Robertson, the secretary-general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The European allies have been cool to the idea of a large-scale U.S. missile defense, knowing that the Russians view it as an attempt by the United States to establish absolute military dominance.
"The message to Russia is that the development of a missile defense system - so we can think beyond the confines of the Cold War era - is the best way to preserve the peace," Fleischer said.
Fleischer made clear that while Bush is consulting allies, he does not plan lengthy deliberations with them.
"From the president's point of view, he views it as a question of leadership," Fleischer said. "He believes that if the United States leads and that we consult wisely, our allies and friends will find good reason to follow and to join with us."
Henry Cooper, who directed the Pentagon's missile defense programs during the first Bush administration, said yesterday he hopes Bush announces his intention to withdraw from the Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty, a 1972 pact with the former Soviet Union that outlawed national missile defenses.
Cooper said he also hoped Bush would press for deployment of at least a rudimentary U.S. missile defense by 2004.
Russia is likely to be encouraged by Bush's interest in further reducing the number of nuclear weapons.
Jan Lodal, who was a senior Pentagon official during the Clinton administration and is an expert on nuclear strategy, said yesterday the important question is whether Bush will commit to a level below the 2,500 warheads that Clinton and former Russian President Boris Yeltsin agreed to pursue in 1997.
"We have to clarify that nuclear weapons no longer have a mission other than deterrence," Lodal said. They no longer are needed as retaliation against a Russian first strike, since that no longer is a threat, nor are they needed as backup for Europe in the event of a massive conventional attack, he said.
Lodal favors cutting to 1,000 warheads. The United States currently has about 7,200 and is committed under the START II treaty to reducing to 3,500.
Gottemoeller, who served on the National Security Council staff during the Clinton administration, said that based on Bush's past statements about cutting nuclear weapons he may want to go below the 2,500 target that Clinton and Yeltsin agreed to in principle (but never formalized), perhaps to the 2,000-1,500 level.
Putin favors cutting to 1,500 on both sides.
