LEAPING THE FIREBREAK

...Existence of the firebreak attests to the fundamental, qualitative difference between the most destructive forms of conventional warfare and the catastrophic potential of nuclear conflict...

...Similarly, adoption of a nuclear "freeze" or "no first use" policy based on the deployment of large quantities of hightech conventional weapons—an approach favored by many Congressional backers of these proposals—may ultimately increase rather than decrease the risk of nuclear war...

...But other analysts argue that the deployment of such conventional weapons by the West will almost inevitably be followed by similar action in the East—thereby forcing NATO to increase rather than decrease its reliance on the nuclear deterrent...

...As high-tech conventional weapons are introduced in ever greater numbers into the world's arsenals, engagements of this sort are likely to become even more intense, and the risk of nuclear war will grow...

...Introduction of high-tech, wide-area conventional arms will certainly produce a new and more lethal battlefield, where anything that moves or gives off heat or sound will be targetable by precision-guided munitions with near-total effectiveness...

...And human survival is being jeopardized right now by developments in both conventional and nuclear weaponry that threaten to eliminate the firebreak, The most basic function of the firebreak is to serve as a powerful psychological deterrent to escalation...

...In his Pugwash presentation, Julian Robinson asked, "May it not be the case that, as more and more of the militarily valued effects available from nuclear weapons come to be provided by a variety of non-nuclear means, a non-nuclear battlefield may come closer and closer to resembling a nuclear one, even to the point where it would seem to make no great practical difference to initiate nuclear war...

...How strong and how permanent a bulwark against nuclear war can such an abstraction be...

...West German Defense Minister Manfred Woerner has acknowledged that "the effectiveness of these [conventional] weapons enters a dimension that heretofore was limited to nuclear weapons...

...This view prompted former Secretary of Defense James R. Schlesinger to suggest in his fiscal 1976 report to Congress that NATO's deterrent would be strengthened by "replacing the existing stockpiles with nuclear weapons and delivery systems more appropriate to the European environment...

...In these circumstances, there will be little inhibition against going "one step further" and substituting nuclear for conventional munitions...

...This is the basis upon which many security analysts, including some who have endorsed a "no first use" nuclear policy, support the development of high-tech conventional weapons...

...This means we have about five years to consider new arms control initiatives and other protective measures—including, if necessary, cancellation of the more threatening nuclear and conventional systems...

...Many of the weapons systems to which I have referred are not expected to become operational until the late 1980s...

...The 'firebreak' must be absolute," Swedish arms expert Alva Myrdal wrote in her classic study, The Game of DisarMichael T. Klare is a fellow of the Institute for Policy Studies in Washington, B.C., and author of a forthcoming book on the conventional arms trade...

...Distinct versions of these weapons are being designed for attacks on vehicles, fortifications, and personnel, so that each missile can be individually loaded for specific targets...

...Although the ensuing battle did not precipitate a nuclear attack, the Falk-lands conflict showed just how intense such small-scale engagements can become...

...By dispersing the submunitions in a uniform pattern, the missile can ensure blanket coverage of sizable areas—as much as one square kilometer, approximately the same area destroyed by a one-kiloton neutron bomb...

...But as .public concern over the risk of nuclear war grows, it should be possible to demonstrate the common stake we all have in the continued safety of the nuclear firebreak...

...The environment of future warfare is likely to differ greatly from any we have known in the past," the Pentagon noted in its Defense Guidance document for the fiscal years 1984-1988...

...Recently, however, the development of new types of both conventional and nuclear munitions has begun to erode the firebreak...

...As conventional weapons become more destructive, it will become possible to escalate non-nuclear conflicts to levels of violence approximating those of a limited nuclear conflict...

...Army last fall, "then the aggressor—should he attack conventionally and his attack be frustrated—would be forced either to withdraw or make the agonizing decision to be the first to escalate to nuclear weapons-la situation in which] I do not believe Soviet leaders would attack...

...Preservation of the firebreak is, therefore, essential to continued human survival...

...In the past decade, military scientists in the United States, Europe, and the Soviet Union have developed new generations of conventional munitions that have greater range, accuracy, and destructive potential than anything previously available...

...Combat against Soviet [and] Soviet-supplied forces will be of higher intensity and longer duration, with weapons of much greater accuracy and possibly higher rates of fire and mobility...

...These efforts are critically important, but they divert attention from the equally threatening trend to merge conventional and nuclear warfare...

...As Julian Perry Robinson of Sussex University's Science Policy Research Unit observed at a recent Pugwash Conference, "If the destructiveness of the one [class of munitions] in fact overlaps with that of the other, the threshold becomes merely symbolic...

...strategists have long advocated the development of battlefield nuclear arms with "near-conventional" damage radii for deployment in Western Europe, to replace the 6,000 or so first-generation and second-generation tactical nuclear munitions now stockpiled there...

...In accordance with this perspective, the United States has already begun to produce the W-79 neutron warhead for the eight-inch howitzers used by both the Army and the Marine Corps...

...Though intended to postpone a nuclear engagement, the missile could be mistaken by the Soviets for one carrying a nuclear warhead, which could result in the nuclear escalation that NATO had intended to avoid...

...Both of these trends—the development of near-nuclear conventional munitions and near-conventional nuclear weapons-are working separately to undermine the firebreak...

...mament...

...A 155-millimeter enhanced radiation warhead, the W-82, is now in advanced development...

...But it is also evident that they are acting./01/irfy to alter the military equation...

...Fortunately, there is still time to preserve the firebreak...

...As now envisioned, the Assault Breaker system (also known as the Joint Tactical Missile System program) will consist of a short-range missile that will break open over the battlefield and spew out hundreds of terminally guided submunitions capable of seeking out and striking individual targets in the area...

...The only sure approach to nuclear peace is one that views protection of the firebreak as imperative...

...Modern conventional weapons employ explosive technologies that begin to approach the damage potential of the smallest nuclear weapons...

...The firing of a cruise missile armed with a conventional warhead may send an ambiguous signal to the Soviets," Bradley Graham wrote in The Washington Post...

...once the firebreak is crossed, though, there can be no such assurances...

...According to U.S...

...I suspect...

...If NATO had those [improved conventional] capabilities," General Bernard W. Rogers, the NATO commander-in-chief, told the Association of the U.S...

...Their use in battle, therefore, could prompt an enemy to order a nuclear strike in the belief he was being attacked with nuclear rather than conventional weapons...

...Scientists have often warned of potential threats to the firebreak, but the discrepancy in destructive power between nuclear and conventional weapons has helped to preserve the gap...

...To be militarily effective in this second role, such battlefield munitions would have to produce relatively confined blast or radiation effects...

...With the deployment of ever more powerful nuclear weapons, that limiting function of the firebreak has assumed tremendous importance, for once the line is crossed, there will be little opportunity to control the process of retaliation and escalation...

...These weapons, often described as "third generation" nuclear arms to distinguish them from the earliest fission and fusion devices (the "first generation") and the compact, high-yield warheads of current nuclear weapons (the "second generation"), could theoretically be used to attack military targets without producing widespread "collateral damage" to surrounding structures and populations...

...I question whether the development [of highly destructive conventional weapons] will raise the nuclear threshold," Colonel Trevor N. Du-puy, a military theorist, wrote in a recent issue of Armed Forces Journal...

...Critics suggest, however, that introduction of these weapons—while arguably less dangerous than the continued deployment of existing, higher-yield nuclear devices—could help erode the nuclear firebreak and thus increase the risk of nuclear war...

...According to recent Congressional testimony, scientists at the Energy Department's Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore laboratories are developing a new generation of nuclear munitions with highly controlled blast, radiation, and heat effects...

...By emphasizing the profound difference between conventional and nuclear war, it underscores the unique military and political risks a government would assume if it were to cross that line...

...Once such levels are reached, tactical nuclear munitions could easily be perceived as essentially interchangeable with the most powerful conventional arms...

...Unfortunately, Robinson's question has gone unanswered...

...Other warheads with equivalent or even smaller radii of destruction are in the planning stage at the Los Alamos and Lawrence Livermore labs...

...Clearly, any disarmament agreements that confine themselves to the most massive of strategic weapons will not, by themselves, diminish the long-term risk of nuclear war if the firebreak continues to be eroded...

...These weapons, combining advanced guidance and target-detection systems with new explosive technologies, are capable of engaging targets with great precision and of saturating very large areas...

...If these low-yield nuclear weapons "become standard equipment," Alva Myrdal argued in The Game of Disarmament, "this would blur the distinction between nuclear and conventional weapons," making escalation across the firebreak more likely...

...Some of these new weapons are intended for use as "defensive" weapons in space—to disable incoming enemy missiles—while others, such as the enhanced radiation or neutron warhead, are intended for use as "battlefield" weapons to attack enemy aircraft, warships, tank formations, and other front-line combat systems...

...The frightening potential of the new generation of intercontinental nuclear missiles and Eurostrategic nuclear arms has impelled national leaders, arms control specialists, and peace activists on both sides of the Atlantic to accord highest priority to the dangers posed by such nuclear weapons...

...that the more effective and destructive conventional weapons have become, the inhibitions on using nuclear weapons are lowered correspondingly...

...Any conflict fought with modern weapons is likely to escalate rapidly into a high-intensity conventional war that could spill over the firebreak and trigger a nuclear holocaust...

...If this analysis is correct, the arms control and disarmament communities will have to develop entirely new strategies for the prevention of nuclear war...

...LEAPING The barrier between conventional and nuclear war may soon be razed THE FIREBREAK BY MICHAEL T. KLARE Since the first atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945, military theorists have recognized that there is a nuclear "firebreak"—a barrier that will prevent even the most intensive forms of conventional combat from escalating into nuclear war...

...If the present distinction between nuclear and conventional weapons becomes blurred, it will be impossible...

...The risk of nuclear esclation may increase further because many of the proposed delivery systems for these new conventional weapons—including the Lance, Patriot, and cruise missiles—are also intended to carry nuclear warheads...

...Because these existing munitions would produce immense collateral damage, NATO officials might hesitate to use them in a crisis...

...Weapons of the type cited by Nunn are being developed under the Pentagon's "Assault Breaker" program, designed to produce conventional arms capable of destroying enemy bases and attack formations deep inside Warsaw Pact territory...

...The danger was vividly demonstrated in 1982, when British forces carried tactical nuclear munitions into the South Atlantic war zone and Argentina engaged the British fleet with its French-made Exocet missiles...

...The expansion of the already crowded arms control agenda will not be easy to achieve...

...Some strategists suggest that deployment of such "near-nuclear" conventional weapons will strengthen deterrence and "raise the nuclear threshold" by enhancing NATO's capacity to repel a conventional Warsaw Pact attack with conventional weapons...

...to avoid uncontrollable escalation...

...As Senator Sam Nunn noted in a report to Congress last year, "Long-range conventional weapons are now being developed that begin to approach the destructive potential of small-yield (two to three kiloton) battlefield nuclear weapons...

...However violent a conflict on the conventional side of the barrier, it cannot annihilate the planet...

...They would, in other words, have to inflict damage not much greater than that of the most powerful conventional weapons...

...military officials and some members of Congress, such weapons are a welcome improvement over existing tactical nuclear munitions because of their reduced collateral-damage effects...

...It is essential that we understand the threats to the firebreak and consider any new steps that may be needed to ensure its preservation...

...And nuclear munitions now under development have the controlled destructive effects associated with conventional arms...

...Just as military scientists are being encouraged to "think big" to produce conventional weapons with damage potentials approaching nuclear arms, nuclear engineers are being encouraged to "think small" to produce nuclear munitions with "near-conventional" damage radii...

...With the introduction of precision-guided munitions and third-generation nuclear weapons, even small combat forces are capable of destroying major enemy forces and installations...

...The firebreak, in other words, is being encroached upon from both sides of the conventional-nuclear spectrum...

...Some analysts regard them, therefore, as a less effective deterrent against Soviet conventional attack than enhanced radiation warheads and other third-generation munitions...

...The firebreak also plays a more direct role in preventing nuclear war: By interrupting the process of escalation, it provides maneuvering space within which warring parties can agree to limit the scale of hostilities...