<abstract xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<p>A counterforce attack intends to disable an opponent's nuclear arsenal to limit potential damage from that adversary. We postulate a future when hardening and deeply burying fixed sites, transition to mobile strategic systems, and improved defences make executing a counterforce strategy against an adversary's nuclear forces extremely difficult. Additionally, our postulated future has multiple nations possessing nuclear weapons. Consequently, each country needs to consider multiple actors when addressing the question of how to deter a potential adversary's nuclear attack. We examine six nuclear targeting alternatives and consider how to deter them. These strategies include nuclear demonstration, conventional military targets, and attacks consisting of communications/electronics, economic, infrastructure, and population centers that a nation might consider striking with nuclear weapons. Since these alternative strikes require only a few nuclear weapons, executing one of them would not significantly shift the balance of nuclear forces. The attacking country's remaining nuclear forces may inhibit the attacked country or its allies from responding. How can nations deter these limited nuclear attacks? Potentially, threatening economic counter-strikes seems to be the best alternative. How might escalation be controlled in the event of a limited attack? Other instruments of power, such as political or economic, might be employed to bolster deterrence against these types of nuclear strikes.</p>
</abstract>

A counterforce attack intends to disable an opponent's nuclear arsenal to limit potential damage from that adversary. We postulate a future when hardening and deeply burying fixed sites, transition to mobile strategic systems, and improved defences make executing a counterforce strategy against an adversary's nuclear forces extremely difficult. Additionally, our postulated future has multiple nations possessing nuclear weapons. Consequently, each country needs to consider multiple actors when addressing the question of how to deter a potential adversary's nuclear attack. We examine six nuclear targeting alternatives and consider how to deter them. These strategies include nuclear demonstration, conventional military targets, and attacks consisting of communications/electronics, economic, infrastructure, and population centers that a nation might consider striking with nuclear weapons. Since these alternative strikes require only a few nuclear weapons, executing one of them would not significantly shift the balance of nuclear forces. The attacking country's remaining nuclear forces may inhibit the attacked country or its allies from responding. How can nations deter these limited nuclear attacks? Potentially, threatening economic counter-strikes seems to be the best alternative. How might escalation be controlled in the event of a limited attack? Other instruments of power, such as political or economic, might be employed to bolster deterrence against these types of nuclear strikes.

Nuclear warfare beyond counterforce

Journal of Military Studies

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

{"article-title":"Nuclear warfare beyond counterforce"}

A counterforce attack intends to disable an opponent's nuclear arsenal to limit potential damage from that adversary. We postulate a future when hardening and...

Perceptions of country being deterred	Restraint from undesired action: Hence, do not use nuclear weapons	Action being deterred: Use of nuclear weapons
Benefits and advantages	Increase benefits and improve advantage	Deny benefits and decrease advantages
Costs and disadvantages	Decreasing costs and reducing disadvantages	Impose costs and increase disadvantages

PMESII category	Alternative nuclear target examined
Political	Nuclear demonstration detonation
Military	Conventional military forces
Economic	Transportation nodes
Social	Population center (Cities)
Information	High-altitude electromagnetic pulse (EMP)
Infrastructure	Power generation plants

Impacts	Types of nuclear attacks

	Demo	Military forces	EMP	Economic	Infrastructure	Population centers
Adversary vital interest	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Civilian causalities	No	Maybe	No	Some	Some	Many
Civilian impact	No	Maybe	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Impact other countries	No	Maybe	Yes	Maybe	Maybe	Maybe (Fallout)
Viability of response in kind	No	Unlikely	No	Maybe	Maybe	Unlikely

Nuclear warfare beyond counterforce

Article Category: Original Study

Online veröffentlicht: 09. Okt. 2021

Seitenbereich: 1 - 9

Eingereicht: 21. Sept. 2019

Akzeptiert: 20. Apr. 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jms-2021-0012

Schlüsselwörter
nuclear strategy, deterrence, targeting

© 2021 Mark Gallagher et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Categories of steps to deter a country's use of nuclear weapons

Alternative nuclear targets

Impacts by types of nuclear attacks

Nuclear warfare beyond counterforce

Article Category: Original Study

Online veröffentlicht: 09. Okt. 2021

Seitenbereich: 1 - 9

Eingereicht: 21. Sept. 2019

Akzeptiert: 20. Apr. 2021

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/jms-2021-0012

Schlüsselwörternuclear strategy, deterrence, targeting

© 2021 Mark Gallagher et al., published by Sciendo

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.

Categories of steps to deter a country's use of nuclear weapons

Alternative nuclear targets

Impacts by types of nuclear attacks

Schlüsselwörter
nuclear strategy, deterrence, targeting