THREAD: NEW: The Trump administration has privately told Congress's defense panels that a new nuclear warhead program is needed to address risks in the nuclear arsenal that are rarely or never aired. /1 https://www.rollcall.com/2020/07/29/trump-teams-case-for-new-nuke-cites-risks-in-current-arsenal/

The W93 sub-launched nuke should be developed, DoD and NNSA said. Why? A) Risks abound in the Navy's nuclear inventory; and B) hedging the risk by relying on bombers ="reduced responsiveness;" & ground-based missiles (ICBMs) are set in a perilous "launch under attack" posture. /2

The "launch under attack" posture that they don't want to rely on refers to the danger of ICBMs being launched within minutes of a possibly false alert of an enemy missile attack--a risk that officials have publicly minimized for years but one they appear to take seriously. /3

The Pentagon and NNSA are worried about risks in the Navy's nuclear arsenal, too. They want a lighter Navy warhead that's more powerful than the W76, the most numerous warhead in the inventory, so they can "hold all targets in current plans at risk." /4

They are worried, too, that a technical problem in the W76 (or in the W76 and the W88, the other Navy warhead), could hurt their ability to deter or fight. /5

They also fret about the $98 billion new Columbia class of 12 subs. Those subs will be able fire fewer missiles than the current Ohio class. So a new, lighter & more powerful warhead would help, they argue. In public, they have called Columbia's reduced firepower acceptable. /6

Plus, anti-sub weapons are limiting operating areas for U.S. "boomer" subs, they implied, and a lighter (therefore longer range) warhead will help. This is a sharp contrast to the usual depiction of the boomer subs as essentially undetectable and all but invulnerable. /7

Critics question the validity of some of these administration claims & say the W93 = overkill. Just one of the Navy's boomers--a fraction of the nuke force at sea, on land & in the air--has nearly 10 times the firepower of all the bombs dropped in WWII, including the A-bombs./8

Whatever one thinks of the administration's arguments, they are extraordinary & groundbreaking. This new weapon has received scant public debate. Just $53 million is on the line this year for design work. But after that, this will become a bigger issue in Washington. / END