No first use

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

No first use (NFU) refers to a pledge or a policy by a nuclear power to not use nuclear weapons as a mean of warfare unless first attacked by an adversary using nuclear weapons. The concept can also be applied to chemical or biological warfare.

As of October 2008, China,^[1] India^[2] and North Korea^[3] have publicly declared their commitment to no first use of nuclear weapons. However various political parties in India have expressed deep opposition of the "no first use" policy.^{[citation needed]}Many political parties have stated that in the event of an attack by a foreign country, India should have the right to defend with "any weapons at her disposal"^{[citation needed]}. Concerns have also been raised over the credibility of China's NFU policy.^[4][5] On November 22, 2008, Pakistan's President said that his country was ready to commit to no first use of nuclear weapons against India.^[6]

NATO has repeatedly rejected calls for adopting NFU policy,^[7] arguing that preemptive nuclear strike is a key option.^[8] In 1993, Russia dropped a pledge given by erstwhile-Soviet Union to not use nuclear weapons first.^[9] In 2000, a Russian military doctrine stated that Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons in response to use of nuclear weapons against it and also "in response to a large-scale conventional aggression".^[10]

Contents 1 Countries pledging no-first-use 1.1 China 1.2 India 2 Countries pledging only to use nuclear weapons defensively 2.1 United Kingdom 2.2 United States 2.3 Pakistan 2.4 Israel 3 See also 4 References 5 Further reading 6 External links

[edit] Countries pledging no-first-use

The People's Republic of China^[11], Republic of India, and North Korea^[3], have pledged not to initiate the use of nuclear weapons in a conflict.

[edit] China

China appears to have backpedaled over its no first use pledge when, in 2005, Chinese Major General Zhu Chenghu, suggested that China would use nuclear weapons if it were attacked with American high-tech military forces. According to Zhu, "If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons." ^[12]

Additionally, the wording of China's "no first use" policy is rather ambiguous in that there are different interpretations of the term "nuclear weapons". Such a weapons category would also include nuclear reactor-powered submarines, aircraft carriers and other such vehicles, so that through the "no first use" policy, retaliation by nuclear strike is an available option in the predicament where another party attacks using such weaponry.

[edit] India

India quickly adopted a "no first use policy" after its nuclear tests in 1998. India's nuclear policy currently states that even though there will be no first-use of nuclear weapons by India, "nuclear retaliation to a first strike will be massive and designed to inflict unacceptable damage".^[13] The current Indian nuclear policy is not, strictly speaking, a "no first use" policy since it allows for the use of nuclear weapons on a nonnuclear state in response to a biological or chemical attack.

Although India has declared a "no first use policy", there are deep oppositions to this policy by various political parties^{[citation needed]}. Many have called for a complete review of this policy. Indian military officials have also cited reasons used by NATO that "preemptive nuclear strike" in case of an attack by a foreign country is a key option^{[citation needed]}.

[edit] Countries pledging only to use nuclear weapons defensively

This section may stray from the topic of the article into the topic of another article, Mutual assured destruction. Please help improve this section or discuss this issue on the talk page.

Pakistan, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States,^[14] and France says they will use nuclear weapons against either nuclear or non-nuclear states only in the case of invasion or other attack against their territory or against one of their allies. Historically, NATO military strategy, taking into account the numerical superiority of Warsaw Pact conventional forces, assumed that the use of tactical nuclear weapons would have been required in defeating a Soviet invasion.^[15]

At a NATO summit in April 1999, Germany proposed that NATO adopt a no-first-use policy, but the proposal was rejected.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] United Kingdom

In March 2002, British defence secretary Geoff Hoon stated that the UK was prepared to use nuclear weapons against rogue states such as Iraq if they ever used "weapons of mass destruction" against British troops in the field.^[16] This policy was restated in February 2003.^[17]

[edit] United States

The US Department of Defense revised the doctrine for the use of nuclear weapons titled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations" and written under the direction of Air Force General Richard B. Myers, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The new doctrine envisions commanders requesting presidential approval to use nuclear weapons to preempt an attack by a nation or a terrorist group using weapons of mass destruction.^[18] The draft also includes the option of using nuclear weapons to destroy known enemy stockpiles of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons. The draft was not approved by former Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.^{[citation needed]} This new policy would update rules and procedures governing use of nuclear weapons to reflect a preemption strategy first announced by the Bush White House in December 2002.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] Pakistan

Pakistan has pledged only to use nuclear weapons defensively. Unlike India, Pakistan does not, and has never had a no-first use policy.

[edit] Israel

Although Israel does not officially confirm or deny having nuclear weapons, the country is widely believed to be in possession of them. Its continued ambiguity stance puts it in a difficult position, since to issue a statement pledging 'no first use' would confirm their possession of nuclear weapons, which would make its support for a WMD-free Middle East untenable. Instead Israel has said that it "would not be the first country in the Middle East to formally introduce nuclear weapons into the region."^[19] If Israel's very existence is threatened, the "Samson Option", a "last resort" deterrence strategy of massive retaliation with nuclear weapons, may be initiated should the state of Israel be substantially damaged and/or near destruction.^{[citation needed]}

[edit] See also

• Nuclear disarmament
• Limited first strike

[edit] References

[edit] Further reading

• Rhona MacDonald: Nuclear Weapons 60 Years On: Still a Global Public Health Threat. In: PLoS Medicine. 2(11)/2005. Public Library of Science, e301, ISSN 1549-1277
• Harold A. Feiveson, Ernst Jan Hogendoorn: No First Use of Nuclear Weapons. In: The Nonproliferation Review. 10(2)/2003. The Center for Nonproliferation Studies, ISSN 1073-6700

[edit] External links

• Document of nuclear doctrine of India
• Andrew Yeh, "China Acts to Ease Fears over N-arms Policy," Financial Times, July 25, 2005
• Publication of US guidelines in nuclear operations