President Plans to Put Emphasis on Air Weapons NATO Welcomes US Plan to Stop Upgrading Short-Range Nuclear Forces in Europe; Now Alliance Must Decide What Weapons to Retain

By Peter Grier, writer of The Christian Science Monitor | The Christian Science Monitor, May 7, 1990 | Go to article overview
Save to active project

President Plans to Put Emphasis on Air Weapons NATO Welcomes US Plan to Stop Upgrading Short-Range Nuclear Forces in Europe; Now Alliance Must Decide What Weapons to Retain


Peter Grier, writer of The Christian Science Monitor, The Christian Science Monitor


MOST NATO allies are mopping their brows in relief that President Bush has recognized the inevitable and agreed to scale back US plans for modernizing short-range nuclear forces in Europe.

The demise of the updated Lance battlefield nuclear missile, in particular, will be mourned by few on either side of the Atlantic. The West Germans did not want to host it; the United States Congress did not want to pay for it. Only the Pentagon kept promoting it to the bitter end.

So when NATO defense ministers meet this week in Calgary, Canada, for a nuclear planning group session, everything should be sweetness and light, right? Not exactly. The NATO consensus is that some short-range nuclear weapons should be retained. But it is not yet decided how many there should be, or where.

NATO needs to settle its position on the issue as talks with the Soviets on short-range weapons are coming quickly. Bush said last week that the short-range question would be high on the agenda of a NATO summit in June, along with a wide-ranging review of the alliance's future mission.

"We need to develop a new strategy for the period ahead," Mr. Bush said.

Bush's announcement that he was killing an updated version of the Lance land-based nuclear missile and ending modernization of the estimated 2,000 155mm nuclear artillery shells in Europe was something less than a surprise. The Lance's potential targets, Eastern European nations, have been rapidly democratizing, and West German officials have been saying that deploying the new missile on their soil in these circumstances would be ludicrous. Members of Congress have been no less dismissive.

"The follow-on to Lance was in fact already dead. The president only performed the last rites," said Rep. Les Aspin (D) of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee.

But the move did not represent the end of modernization for the US short-range nuclear arsenal. In essence, Bush announced that the US was switching its short-range emphasis from land-based systems to weapons carried on airplanes.

The US at present has an estimated 1,400 free-fall nuclear bombs for tactical aircraft in Europe. In addition, the US is developing a new tactical air-to-surface nuclear missile (TASM), with a range of 400 km, for deployment on F/B-111 medium bombers, new F-15E strike fighters, and other planes.

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
Loading One moment ...
Project items
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited article

President Plans to Put Emphasis on Air Weapons NATO Welcomes US Plan to Stop Upgrading Short-Range Nuclear Forces in Europe; Now Alliance Must Decide What Weapons to Retain
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

While we understand printed pages are helpful to our users, this limitation is necessary to help protect our publishers' copyrighted material and prevent its unlawful distribution. We are sorry for any inconvenience.
Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.

Are you sure you want to delete this highlight?