Do You Support a No-First-Strike Nuclear Weapons Policy?

What’s the story?

• Presidential-hopeful Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) and Rep. Adam Smith (D-WA) have introduced legislation that would stop the U.S. from launching a first-strike nuclear weapon on another country. 

• The move came days before – and maybe in anticipation of – an announcement on Friday that the U.S. would withdraw from the landmark Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) treaty, signed in 1987 by Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev.
• There's currently a re-introduced bill in Congress asking: Does the President Need to be Blocked From Launching a Nuclear First Strike Unless Congress Declares War?

What would the No First Use Act do?

• The text is pretty straightforward, saying that “it is the policy of the United States not to use nuclear weapons first.”

What are Ds and Rs saying?

• “We have prevented the use of nuclear weapons in war for 72 years,” Smith said in a statement.

“We must continue working to ensure they will not be employed by taking steps to increase strategic stability, stem the incentives for nuclear proliferation and reduce the likelihood that these weapons will be used irresponsibly in a conflict."

• Sen. Deb Fischer (R-NE), the chairwoman of the Armed Services Committee Subcommittee on Strategic Forces - which oversees America's nuclear weapons – rebuked the Warren-Smith legislation.
• "Presidents from both parties, including the Obama administration, have rejected a no-first-use policy because it erodes deterrence, undermines allied confidence in US security guarantees and risks emboldening potential adversaries," Fisher said, adding that the legislation "betrays a naïve and disturbed world view."

What do you think?

Do you support the No First Strike act? Or is it a “naïve a disturbed world view”? Take action and tell your reps, then share your thoughts below.

—Josh Herman

(Photo Credit: iStockphoto.com / rusm)