Nuclear arms cuts could produce huge savings, says report

The US could save $70 billion over the next 10 years by taking “common sense” measures to trim its nuclear forces, yet still deploy the maximum number of warheads permitted under the New START Treaty, according to a new report by the Arms Control Association. Those steps include cutting the number of proposed new ballistic missile submarines to eight from 12, delaying plans to build new nuclear-capable bombers, scaling back the upgrade of a nuclear bomb, and forgoing development of a new intercontinental ballistic missile system.

“In my view, this is really a nuclear ATM that we can cash in on and take money out of and spend it on other things,” said Tom Collina, the report author. Further savings could be achieved if the one-third reduction in the nuclear stockpile proposed by President Obama in 2013 were to be enacted, the report said.

The current plan to rebuild US nuclear forces will cost at least $355 billion over the next decade, the Congressional Budget Office estimated in a December 2013 report. The CBO put the cost of the US Navy’s plan to design and procure 12 new ballistic missile submarines to replace the existing Ohio-class boats at $100 billion. But Collina said that the US could get by with eight new subs simply by having them patrol closer to US shores, instead of deploying them near the coasts of Russia and China.

The Long Range Strike Bomber that the US Air Force wants to build could cost $80 billion, according to the report. But the existing fleet of B-2s and B-52s are expected to operate into the 2050s. The CBO has estimated that delaying the LRSB program until the mid-2020s would yield a savings of $32 billion over the next 10 years. Forgoing a new intercontinental ballistic missile to replace the Minuteman III could save $15 billion by 2023. And cancelling a replacement for the air-launched nuclear-armed cruise missile could save $3 billion over the next decade.

The Department of Energy’s proposal for upgrading five warhead types to extend their lives will cost $60 billion, the report said. The first in line, the B61, will cost $8 billion to refurbish according to DOE, and $10.4 billion, according to the Defense Department. The cost of the B61 program could be halved by upgrading only the strategic versions of the bomb; this would exclude the tactical bombs stationed outside the US in NATO countries, the future role of which is unclear. “Maybe right now is not the best time to remove tactical nuclear weapons from Europe,” admitted Collina, alluding to current tensions over Russian forays into Ukraine, “but that doesn’t mean we have to spend billions of dollars on extending their life for another 20 or 30 years. The ones we have there will last another decade or so.”