Committee 5 SP. Management and Alternatives Main Readings: NATO's nuclear forces. Web site Arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation in NATO. & NATON’s position regarding….Web site. The Broader Context of NATO's Nuclear Policy and Posture- Michael RÜHLE NATO's Nuclear Weapons in Europe: Beyond "Yes" or "No“- Karl-Heinz KAMP NATO’s Deterrence and Defense Posture after Chicago Summit- David S. Yost. NATO's Incredible Nuclear Strategy: Why U.S. Weapons in Europe Deter No One-Edmond Seay. Tactical nuclear weapons and NATO - Nichols, Tom and others, US Army War College SC118-8 The future of NATO’s nuclear posture, what to do with the Elephant in the Room US Nuclear Weapons in Europe. Hans M. Kristensen. Taking steps toward a world free of nuclear weapons. Sam Nunn. NATO’s new strategic concept, nuclear weapons, and global cero. Ian P. Rutherford. Spoiler and enabler: The role of ballistic-missile defence in nuclear abolition- Senn, M. Mind the Gap. Healing the NATO rift over US tactical nuclear weapons in Europe. British American security information council. US tactical nuclear weapons in Europe after NATO’s Lisbon Summit: why their withdrawl is desirable and feasible- Tom Sauer. NATO Nuclear Sharing and the NPT - Questions to be Answered, joint PENN/BASIC-BITS-CESD-ASPR Research Note 97.3, June 1997 NATO Nuclear Sharing and the NPT - Questions to be Answered Questions of Command and Control: NATO, Nuclear Sharing and the NPT, PENN Research Report , Martin Butcher et al., 2000 Questions of Command and Control: NATO, Nuclear Sharing and the NPT Nuclear Sharing in NATO: Is it Legal?, Otfried Nassauer, Institute for Energy and Environmental Research, May 2001 Nuclear Sharing in NATO: Is it Legal?Institute for Energy and Environmental Research NATO Nuclear Power Sharing and the NPT, Denise Groves, Berlin Information-center for Transatlantic Security, 6 August 2000 NATO Nuclear Power Sharing and the NPTBerlin Information-center for Transatlantic Security NATO's Positions Regarding Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Arms Control and Disarmament and Related Issues, NATO, June 2005 NATO's Positions Regarding Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Arms Control and Disarmament and Related IssuesNATO United States Air Forces in Europe - Munitions Support Squadron, GlobalSecurity.org United States Air Forces in Europe - Munitions Support Squadron Statement on behalf of the non-aligned state parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, 2 May 2005 Statement on behalf of the non-aligned state parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons Opposition to Nuclear Sharing Leads to Proposed Senate Amendment on NATO Expansion, British American Security Information Council, May 1998 Opposition to Nuclear Sharing Leads to Proposed Senate Amendment on NATO ExpansionBritish American Security Information Council NPT à la Carte? NATO and Nuclear Non-Proliferation, Nicola Butler, Acronym Institute, 2005 NPT à la Carte? NATO and Nuclear Non-ProliferationAcronym Institute A Constructed Peace: The Making of the European Settlement, (Chapter 5: Eisenhower and Nuclear Sharing), Marc Trachtenberg, 1999, Princeton University Press, ISBN A Constructed Peace: The Making of the European Settlement, ISBN

Committee 5 SP. Management and Alternatives Nuclear weapons management in NATO. NATO posture. Strategic Concept and DDPR. – Sharing responsibilities: DCA and support Planning: no targeting. USA and UK nuc Submarines. – Nuclear Planning Group- NPG. Consultation & Policy – SACEUR responsibility Use and Decision making process: – extremely remote – Dual approval process: weapon owner and delivery state. Training: – Annual “Able Staff” exercise. No publicity, low profile. Factors for the future: – modernization, high cost, public opinion, France involvement.

Committee 5 Location US Nuclear Bases

Committee 5 Status of US Nuclear weapon in Europe

Committee 5 Continued

Committee 5 SP. Management and Alternatives Possible alternatives. Missile Defence. Main candidate. – Official posture: NO SUBSTITUTE. DDPR. Complementary (Michael Ruhle) – Sceptics: it will promote proliferation and is not a good option. (Tom Sauer and Ian Rutherford) – Euro-Bomb. France and the “Europeanist”. Concentrate instead in counter proliferation. (Rutherford) NATO’s nuclear force. – Not feasible in the short/medium term Modern Conventional weapons: – Not enough deterrence.... Strategic Nuclear weapons and submarines: – Already in place. Not an alternative Factors: – Russia/USA negotiations. Link between MD and Nuclear disarmament. New SART treaty. – Border nations compensation. Poland, Chez Republic and Turkey