Carter’s nuclear remarks indicate divide in US: Analyst

Press TV has conducted an interview with Jan Oberg, founder of transnational.org, and Lawrence J. Korb, a US foreign policy and national security analyst, to discuss the announcement made by US Defense Secretary Ashton Carter that the United States is not committed to a “no-first-use” policy with regard to its nuclear weapons.

Under the no-first-use doctrine, a nuclear power undertakes not to be the first one to use nuclear weapons during a war.

Oberg believes Carter’s remarks on the US nuclear policy indicate a “discrepancy” if not a “rift” between the White House and the Pentagon.

He also said that Carter has undermined completely any kind of initiative regarding the use of nuclear weapons by US President Barack Obama.

“President Obama wants to present something that has to do with nuclear weapons before he leaves office … This would be that the United States will reconsider or even abolish the idea of being the first to use nuclear weapons even against a conventional attack,” he stated.

Carter’s comments came after Obama considered an overhaul of the country’s nuclear policy, including the implementation of a no-first-use doctrine.

America and other North Atlantic Treaty Organization members do not currently stick to such a policy, while China, considered an adversary nuclear power by Washington, maintains that policy.

The analyst went on to say there is a “total conflict” in the Obama administration over different issues, adding that at the moment the United States does not have a “unified foreign policy” which should be a deep concern for the rest of the world.

Oberg further mentioned those who have nuclear weapons and believe in deterrence have the same philosophy as the terrorist groups.

“The definition of terrorism is the deliberate targeting and killing or maiming or harming of civilians who are innocent in a conflict. There is no way in which you can use nuclear weapons without killing maybe hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of civilians,” he added.

The analyst noted that nuclear weapons are “immoral” and there is no political excuse to argue that it is legitimate, legal, necessary or morally justifiable to kill millions of people.

Oberg also argued nuclear weapons are dangerous even in peacetime because they create “political conflicts.”

Korb, for his part, believes the United States is “modernizing” its nuclear weapons while it has cut the number of them.

“It used to be, during the Cold War, if you were in the service, if you were in the air force, you would go into the missile business because that was what people perceived as the main line of defense against the Soviet Union which had an overwhelming advantage in conventional forces but since the end of the Cold War people have realized that the chances of this happening are really not that great,” he said.

According to the analyst, most in the US military would like to cut the number of nuclear weapons because they prefer to spend the money on conventional forces.

Press TV’s website can also be accessed at the following alternate addresses:

www.presstv.co.uk