Former president John F. Kennedy argued in 1960 that the development “of a relatively small hydrogen warhead made missiles the key to future military power.” Kennedy ran for president in 1960 on a supposed military gap, maintaining that the platform that the United States under the Eisenhower Administration had not adequately prepared the nation for a possible nuclear defense against the Soviet Union. Unfortunately, Kennedy’s assumptions about the unpreparedness of the U.S. missile defense system still hold true today. We need to have a more comprehensive strategy towards protecting our nuclear weapons.

Every administration post-Kennedy and pre-1989 placed an enormous emphasis on building up the U.S. nuclear arsenal in order to defeat the Soviet Union, and that mentality has set the precedent for modern U.S. foreign policy. The 1963 Partial Test Ban Treaty was followed by the 1970 Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty and the 1996 Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. The NPT has been the international consensus on how to protect of the world against nuclear weapons.

The NPT is seen as a universally agreed upon bargain: “the NPT non-nuclear-weapon states agree never to acquire nuclear weapons and the NPT nuclear-weapon states in exchange agree to share the benefits of peaceful nuclear technology and to pursue nuclear disarmament aimed at the ultimate elimination of their nuclear arsenals.” Idealistic peace treaties like the NPT, however, hardly mirrors what nuclear discourse is like in real life. There is no way any governing body, national or global, can actively prevent a nation from acquiring nuclear technologies. Techniques like international trade sanctions, while a popular tool in the arsenal of international governments, are generally ineffective — just ask North Korea how much impact sanctions have had on their quest to develop a nuclear warhead.

The unfortunate reality is that our government, past and present, is not doing enough to address the issue. In 1995, President Clinton ordered a study called “Essentials of Post-Cold War Deterrence.” The study chillingly concluded that the United States must retain the right of first-strike, even against non-nuclear states. It explains that nuclear weapons are being used even when they are not directly used because they “cast a shadow over any crisis or conflict.” It also encouraged a “national persona” of irrationality and vindictiveness to intimidate the world. Even if there is not an active nuclear war, there is still the ever present threat of one. This needs to start with our government spending more money on upgrading its missile defense systems. History has shown that our nuclear policies need updating if we are to keep our country safe and maintain our status on the world stage.

Opinions expressed on the editorial pages are not necessarily those of WSN, and our publication of opinions is not an endorsement of them.

Email Charles Moxley at [email protected].