In recent days, some former U.S. officials, including former U.S. Defense Secretary William Perry, as well as nuclear disarmament experts, have reportedly issued an open letter to Japanese sources saying that the U.S. may declare a “no first use of nuclear weapons” position, asking Japanese political parties not to oppose a change in U.S. nuclear position. So will the U.S. change its nuclear policy? What is the real intention of the US move? On related topics, Wang Bing, a reporter for the Central Committee of the Central Committee of the People’s Political Consultation, interviewed Liang Yongchun, a military observer.
Reported that the letter was written to Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga and other Japanese political party leaders. The letter says U.S. President Joe Biden is considering issuing a statement saying the U.S. will not use nuclear weapons in the initial attack.
Liang Yongchun, a military observer, said the U.S. nuclear policy would not change because of Biden’s personal thinking and that the U.S. would not commit to “not being the first to use nuclear weapons.”
Liang Yongchun:
I don’t think Biden would make such a statement. Because America’s nuclear policy is not something he can change on his own. After the end of the Cold War, the United States began in 1994, every eight years by the Department of Defense issued a “nuclear posture assessment report” to plan the next eight years of the United States nuclear policy and nuclear weapons construction direction.
The U.S. Nuclear Posture Review has published four so far, the most recent of which was released by the Trump administration in February 2018. The report makes it clear that the United States and its allies will use nuclear weapons in the event of a nuclear attack and a so-called non-nuclear strategic attack. What is a non-nuclear strategic attack? The United States has deliberately failed to say, but in general it is clear that, even if it has not been attacked by a nuclear attack, it can define these acts as so-called non-nuclear strategic attacks, and the United States can strike others with nuclear weapons as long as its vital interests are affected. The policy will last at least until 2018 and 2026, something Biden can’t change.
The U.S. Nuclear Posture Review also announced that the U.S. will invest $400 billion over the next 10 years to develop new types of nuclear weapons, particularly so-called low-equivalent nuclear weapons that can be used flexibly. If the United States were to declare now that it would “not be the first to use nuclear weapons”, what would have been necessary for that large investment? That project is not set up.
Investing $400 billion over 10 years to develop new types of nuclear weapons is a very important way for the U.S. military industry to make money. If a president dares to break this path of wealth, then the military industry will surely cut off his life and end his political life.
The United States has previously sounded the wind, saying it may declare “no first use of nuclear weapons.” Japan is concerned about losing america’s nuclear umbrella. Liang Yongchun, a military observer, believes that the nuclear umbrella is also an important means for the United States to control its allies, and the United States will never give up.
Liang Yongchun:
There has been talk in the United States that it might declare “no first use of nuclear weapons”. After hearing these rumors, Japan was worried about losing the protection of U.S. nuclear weapons and being threatened by other nuclear powers, such as Russia. In fact, the nuclear umbrella provided by the United States is both a shield for its allies and a restriction and control over them. Countries like Japan and Germany, which have fought with the United States before, cannot develop nuclear weapons, and Britain’s is directly in the hands of the United States. So since these countries are all protected by the United States, of course, they have to listen to the United States. If the United States promises not to “not be the first to use nuclear weapons”, not only will these allies panic, but the elites of American politics will not agree. This is determined by the hegemonic policies of the United States.
Former U.S. President Barack Obama, who also opposes nuclear weapons, also made the so-called “nuclear-free world” slogan, but in 2010, during his tenure, the U.S. Department of Defense issued the Nuclear Posture Review without committing to “not being the first to use nuclear weapons.” Biden was Obama’s vice president at the time, and the two of them may be closer on nuclear weapons, something That Obama couldn’t have done in the middle of the day, but now Biden can’t do it as a weaker president.
Nuclear weapons have dual strategic value to the United States, which can use them not only to deter strategic adversaries, but also to control allies. Especially now that America’s overall strength and prestige are declining, nuclear weapons are a powerful means for it to hold on to its allies and control them, and the United States will never give up.
Liang Yongchun, a military observer, believes that while the U.S. and Russia continue to engage in strategic stability dialogue, the U.S. deliberately let out the possibility of “not being the first to use nuclear weapons” in an attempt to pull China into nuclear arms control negotiations between the U.S. and Russia, thereby curbing China’s development and limiting China’s ability to safeguard its legitimate rights and interests, which is unlikely to succeed.
Liang Yongchun:
The Biden administration’s nuclear policy does make some adjustments compared to the Trump era. Mr. Trump was more extreme, bent on another nuclear arms race in an attempt to drag Down Russia and overwhelm China. After Biden took office, the United States and Russia renewed the Starting New Arms Reduction Treaty, and recently the U.S. and Russia are engaged in a strategic stabilization dialogue. Biden is trying to pull China in to negotiate with him to tie China’s hand and foot and prevent it from turning its strong national power into its own military might. This is also the fundamental purpose of the United States to vent its wind to claim that it is “not the first to use nuclear weapons”. China’s nuclear weapons are far from a horizontal line compared with those of the United States and Russia, and we cannot be fooled by him.
The blood of the Chinese nation does not have the genes to invade others and dominate. What weapons we develop and how many are developed is to protect our legitimate interests. In the face of aggressive and overbearing countries, we must have the means to scare them in order to be more conducive to regional and world peace.
