Do We Still Need Nukes? Yep, Says Head of Strategic Command
Admiral Cecil Haney says the U.S. still shouldn’t scrap its nuclear weapons.

-/AFP/Getty
Today the United States has 4,600 nuclear weapons, and is planning to spend up to $1 trillion over the next 30 years refurbishing them. But in the post-Cold War era, is that really necessary?
Admiral Cecil D. Haney, head of the U.S. Strategic Command, says it is.
“We have to maintain strategic stability as a first and foremost principle," Haney said.
There are a number of ways nuclear weapons do this, he says. The first one is the most obvious—they deter our enemies (e.g., North Korea) and frenemies (e.g., Russia) from doing anything truly catastrophic.
ADVERTISEMENT
But there’s also an important effect nukes have on our allies, Haney says.
Get the best of The Beast delivered right to your inbox
By clicking “SUBSCRIBE” you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
“We don’t want the allies we provide assurance to, and what have you, to decide that they want to develop their own capability,” he said. “That would be a bad state of affairs.”
In other words, a strong nuclear stockpile may actually do more to prevent proliferation than it does to perpetuate it.
Or, as Donald Trump once put it, “With nuclear, the power, the devastation is very important to me.”
Register below to read this article for free or subscribe
to unlock unlimited access to The Daily Beast.
Monthly
$1
First month then $5.99/month
Annual
$35
First year then $59.99/year
Premium
$79
First year then $119.99/year
*Substack access provided by the next business day, using your subscription email. Choosing the Premium plan constitutes your permission to share your subscription email with Substack and your agreement to Substack’s Privacy Policy.
Already have an account? Sign In
Looks like you already have a subscription!
You're all set!
Thanks for subscribing.
