WASHINGTON — President-elect Donald Trump's nuclear agenda remains opaque, but current Air Force officials are cautiously optimistic that he will stay the course on nuclear modernization.
Trump raised eyebrows during his campaign with vague statements on nuclear issues that sometimes contradicted longstanding US policy, such as when he said he was prepared to allow South Korea and Japan attain nuclear weapons.
He frequently went back and forth on when he would be prepared to use nuclear force, often stating he would "be the last person" to use nuclear weapons but at the same time refusing to rule out nuclear attacks in Europe or against the Islamic State.
"Well, it is an absolute last stance," he said on CBS in January. "And, you know, I use the word unpredictable. You want to be unpredictable."
Military officials interviewed for this article largely downplayed concerns about Trump's fitness to control nukes. Instead, they portrayed the nuclear arsenal as one of the few weapons enterprises supported by presidential administrations regardless of party affiliation.
"I would be lying if I said we don't wonder. Of course we do. But I tell you what, I am just absolutely confident," Maj. Gen. Michael Fortney, vice commander of Air Force Global Strike Command, said when asked about how a Trump presidency could affect the nuclear enterprise.
"Every administration from the time I've been alive has supported the nuclear triad, a strong deterrent assured force. And the need for that strong deterrent assured force is going to be just as strong in January as it is today," he said. "So I am confident for the need for the systems that we have that do deter and do assure our allies and partners, that's going to be seen from any administration. The next one and the one after that."
Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James will hold her first meeting with Trump’s transition team this week. In a Dec. 8 interview with Defense News, James said she plans to raise the topic of the nuclear enterprise. She also intends to share her insights and experiences from trips to the bases that host bombers and ICBMs, including her most recent visit to F.E. Warren Air Force Base in Wyoming last week.
"It is certainly my belief that the next administration is going to be supportive of the thrust of the last few years, the focus on people, the focus on the readiness, the focus on modernization," she said. "Everything that I've heard and seen so far suggest that they are going to very much be supportive of the nuclear enterprise."
Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. David Goldfein and Lt. Gen. Jack Weinstein, the service’s deputy chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration, have already met with Trump’s transition team.
"Nuclear has been foundational to the defense of our nation through seven administrations. I don’t see it changing for this one," Weinstein said last week, adding that he planned to meet with the team again on Dec. 12.
During the first session, "we discussed the threats that exist from other nations, we discussed where we are with modernization programs and the changes we’ve made," he said. "It was a really open, transparent and really productive meeting."
One of the biggest questions is whether Trump will alter current plans to acquire the new bombers, ballistic missile submarines and intercontinental ballistic missiles — the three weapons known as the nuclear triad — as well as a nuclear-capable cruise missile for the B-21 bomber.
Although Trump has not directly addressed the issue, his transition website suggests a commitment to upholding the triad.
Trump "recognizes the uniquely catastrophic threats posed by nuclear weapons and cyber attacks," the website reads. "Mr. Trump will ensure our strategic nuclear triad is modernized to ensure it continues to be an effective deterrent, and his administration will review and minimize our nation’s infrastructure vulnerabilities to cyber threats."
However, Trump’s nominee for defense secretary, retired Marine Gen. James Mattis, has previously questioned whether all three legs of the triad are necessary.
"Is it time to reduce the triad to a dyad, removing the land‐based missiles?" Mattis asked during a 2015 Senate panel.
Even if Trump moves forward with the three acquisition programs meant to modernize the nuclear triad — the B-21 bomber and Ground Based Strategic Deterrent, both overseen by the Air Force, and the Navy’s Ohio replacement submarine — the president-elect still has several options to grow or roll back the size of the arsenal.
In a Dec. 8 report, the Congressional Budget Office proposed cuts to the nuclear triad in an effort to reduce the nation's deficit.
Under the Obama administration’s current budget plans, the Air Force plans to ultimately procure as many as 100 B-21 bombers and 642 new ICBMs. The Navy is set to buy 12 ballistic missile submarines or SSBNs. Those acquisition programs will about double the usual spending on nuclear weapons— currently about $20 billion a year — through the mid 2030s, CBO said.
The analysts offered two potential plans that would have the Defense Department retain the triad, but in smaller numbers. One path would take the nuclear force down to 1,550 warheads, reducing the arsenal to 10 SSBNs and 300 ICBMs, which would trim about $12.3 billion from the 2017 to 2026 budget submission. An even more drastic plan would cut it down to 1,000 warheads — leaving 8 SSBNs and 150 ICBMs — and decreasing the budget authority over the next 10 years by $17 billion.
The bomber fleet, which can be employed for both nuclear and conventional missions, would be left alone in both of those scenarios, but CBO also presented two alternative plans that target the B-21. The first would eliminate the Long Range Standoff Weapon, which would allow the B-21 to conduct nuclear strikes from a distance, to save about $9 billion. Another option would defer development of the B-21 until after 2026, reducing new budget authority by $39 billion.
Conversely, Trump could also make changes to the nuclear posture that boost procurement numbers. Air Force advocacy groups and supporters in Congress have championed a 200-aircraft buy of the B-21, for example.
James said it’s likely the Trump administration will conduct a nuclear posture review before making any sweeping changes to the nuclear enterprise.
The Defense Department has not conducted a nuclear posture review since 2010, when the United States had a better relationship with Russia and was collaborating on nuclear disarmament agreements like the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty. One senior Air Force official remembered relations during the early part of the decade being so cozy that he hosted a meeting with a Russian strategic forces official at an ICBM base.
"It was an open dialogue, we had a great discussion ... he answered all my questions, we drank vodka, great time. That's not the relationship we have right now. It would be great if it came back, but the whole world environment has changed," he said. "I think it would be good to evaluate the current world environment, what the threat is out there and what’s the best way to keep us safe at a cost that’s reasonable."
Staff Sgt. Tara Kindermann, 490th Missile Squadron facility manager, inspects the diesel electric unit generator at a missile alert facility Oct. 19 at Malmstrom Air Force Base, Mont.The DEU provides power to the site when commercial power is unavailable.
Photo Credit: Senior Airman Jaeda Tookes/US Air Force
Yet another unknown is whether the Trump administration will continue to raise the profile of the nuclear workforce. The eight years of Obama’s tenure as president were plagued by multiple scandals implicating Air Force nuclear personnel in systemic cheating on tests and drug use. Before that, under President George W. Bush, the service saw a particularly embarrassing incident where the officials lost track of nuclear-tipped cruise missiles for more than a day.
The Air Force responded by pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into funding immediate equipment needs and into policy changes that addressed training and morale. While it is unknown whether the Trump administration will continue these efforts, multiple service officials pointed to recent changes in the Air Force chain of command — including elevating Global Strike Command’s head to a four-star position and the promotion of the service’s deputy chief of staff for strategic deterrence and nuclear integration to the two-star general.
Ultimately, the hope is that uniformed leaders will help safeguard the nuclear community and prevent it from becoming neglected once again.
"Before [the scandals], the highest ranking advocate you had for the nuclear enterprise was a colonel," said one Air Force official not authorized to speak on the record. "Now you have a four star and a three star, and that’s very difficult to ignore."
"If we run into a position where we’re removing that level of senior leader from the nuclear enterprise, then I will become concerned again," he added.
Editor's note: This story was updated on Dec. 19 to reflect that a 2007 Air Force mishap of unaccounted nuclear weapons occurred before President Obama took office.
Valerie Insinna is Defense News' air warfare reporter. She previously worked the Navy/congressional beats for Defense Daily, which followed almost three years as a staff writer for National Defense Magazine. Prior to that, she worked as an editorial assistant for the Tokyo Shimbun’s Washington bureau.
