{
  "id": "RL30345",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "RL30345",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 105460,
      "date": "2001-06-01",
      "retrieved": "2016-05-24T20:24:21.405941",
      "title": "U.S. Nuclear Weapons: Policy, Force Structure, and Arms Control Issues",
      "summary": "During the Cold War, the United States maintained nuclear weapons to deter, and if necessary,\ndefeat\nthe Soviet Union. These weapons were designed to deter nuclear attack on the United States, and\nnuclear, chemical, and conventional attacks on U.S. allies in Europe and Asia. The United States\ndeployed a wide variety of nuclear weapons delivery vehicles and was prepared to destroy large\nnumbers of military, industrial, and leadership targets in the Soviet Union. The United States agreed\nto restrict the deployment of strategic ballistic missile defenses in the 1972 Anti-ballistic Missile\n(ABM) Treaty. And, although the United States and Soviet Union participated in negotiations to\nreduce offensive nuclear weapons, these efforts did little to reduce the numbers of deployed weapons\nduring the 1970s and 1980s.\n  After the demise of the Soviet Union in 1991, Russia remained a concern for U.S. national\nsecurity because it still retained thousands of nuclear weapons, but other emerging threats from\nregional adversaries also prompted concerns. The Clinton Administration argued that nuclear\nweapons remained important to deter the full range of threats to the United States. So, even though\nthe United States and Russia withdrew most of their deployed non-strategic nuclear weapons and\npledged to reduce their strategic forces under the START I and START II treaties, the United States\ndid little to alter the basic tenets of its nuclear strategy and doctrine.\n  In late 1997, the Clinton Administration issued a new Presidential Decision Directive (PDD-60)\nthat outlined strategy and policy for U.S. nuclear weapons. This document stated that the United\nStates would no longer seek to win a protracted nuclear war with Russia, but that it would only seek\nto deter such a conflict. At the same time, the United States would retain a range of options for the\nemployment of nuclear weapons, and it would not forswear the first use of nuclear weapons if it were\nattacked with chemical, biological, or conventional weapons. The Clinton Administration has also\nsought to continue the START process to reduce strategic forces with Russia, and it has pledged to\nseek amendments to the ABM Treaty so that the United States can deploy a limited national ballistic\nmissile defense system to protect against small-scale ballistic missile attacks.\n  Many analysts have offered alternatives to the Clinton Administration's approach to nuclear\nweapons policy. Some support an explicit threat to retaliate with nuclear weapons after a biological\nweapons attack; others argue that the United States should only threaten nuclear retaliation if it is\nattacked with nuclear weapons. Some argue that the United States should remain cautious about the\narms reduction process with Russia, while others argue that the two nations should move quickly to\nreduce sharply the numbers of nuclear weapons in their forces and to reduce the alert rates for those\nweapons so that they could not be launched quickly. Some argue that the United States should\naccelerate the deployment of ballistic missile defenses, while others argue that such defenses will\ndo little to protect the United States from emerging threats and could, instead, undermine reductions\nwith Russia. The Bush Administration has undertaken a review of nuclear policy and these issues\nare likely to remain on the congressional agenda for the foreseeable future.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/RL30345",
          "sha1": "8bdfca57c14176f0a64bef350ea1d4637a434a06",
          "filename": "files/20010601_RL30345_8bdfca57c14176f0a64bef350ea1d4637a434a06.pdf",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "filename": "files/20010601_RL30345_8bdfca57c14176f0a64bef350ea1d4637a434a06.html"
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Foreign Affairs",
    "National Defense"
  ]
}