US Senator Jack Reed may be the most important member of Congress when it comes to stopping the development of a new nuclear weapon, according to Rhode Island peace activists. As chairman of the US Senate Armed Forces Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, Reed is considering whether to fund research for the "bunker-buster" nuclear weapon proposed in President George W. Bush's Nuclear Posture Review.

Reed and the peace movement agree on the dangers of the new policy, but Rhode Island's senior senator will not promise to oppose all funding for the bunker-buster.

Warning that weapons of mass destruction could be manufactured in underground bunkers, the Bush administration wants to develop "an earth-penetrating nuclear weapon," according to excerpts from the review document provided by Reed's office. Bush's proposed budget includes $15 million to research the new weapon.

Research may sound harmless, but Carol Bragg, coordinator of the Rhode Island Peace Mission, says that once research begins, Congress and the president almost always continue the project until the weapon is manufactured and readied for use. The Republican-controlled US House of Representatives is certain to approve funding for the bunker-buster, Bragg says, so the best hope for stopping it rests with the US Senate. Should the Democrat-controlled Senate approve research on the weapon, and then lose their majority in the November elections, Republicans are certain to continue its development, she adds.

The US should proceed "very, very slowly" says Reed, agreeing with Bragg that once the new nuclear weapon is designed the Department of Defense will want to test it. "Our concern," he says, "is to make sure study doesn't become a fait accompli [for development and testing]," but he stops short of promising to oppose funding for the Department of Energy study.

Bush's Nuclear Posture Review includes other recommendations that, according to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld represent "a major change in our approach to the role of nuclear offensive forces." Embracing a first-strike policy, Reed comments, "is terribly destablilizing" and "a step backwards." For the first time in US history, the review also proposes aiming nuclear weapons at non-nuclear states, specifically North Korea, Libya, Iraq, Iran, and Syria. That is "a very dangerous and precipitous path," says Reed, which lowers the threshold for using nuclear weapons.

Bragg agrees, noting that US nuclear weapons were only previously aimed at China and Russia. Targeting non-nuclear nations encourages them to develop their own nuclear weapons in self-defense, she argues, and helps Russian militarists pushing to aim nuclear weapons at eastern Europe.

The document also suggests nuclear testing, stopped by the United States in 1992, may resume. Although the policy statement advocates continuing the testing moratorium, it adds that it "may not be possible for the indefinite future." Reed, however, supports a continued test ban, observing, "It's hard to convince India and Pakistan [not to test] as soon as we start testing."

Reed expects his subcommittee to make a recommendation to the full committee in a week on whether to fund the bunker-buster. Meanwhile, the coalition of religious groups that comprise the Rhode Island Peace Mission will increase efforts to persuade Reed to oppose the move, according to Bragg.

Issue Date: May 3 - 9, 2002