This is from today’s Gaurdian:

Pre-emptive nuclear strike a key option, NATO told

The west must be ready to resort to a pre-emptive nuclear attack to try to halt the “imminent” spread of nuclear and other weapons of mass destruction, according to a radical manifesto for a new NATO by five of the west’s most senior military officers and strategists.

Calling for root-and-branch reform of NATO and a new pact drawing the US, NATO and the European Union together in a “grand strategy” to tackle the challenges of an increasingly brutal world, the former armed forces chiefs from the US, Britain, Germany, France and the Netherlands insist that a “first strike” nuclear option remains an “indispensable instrument” since there is “simply no realistic prospect of a nuclear-free world”.

The manifesto has been written following discussions with active commanders and policymakers, many of whom are unable or unwilling to publicly air their views. It has been presented to the Pentagon in Washington and to NATO’s secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, over the past 10 days. The proposals are likely to be discussed at a NATO summit in Bucharest in April.
“The risk of further [nuclear] proliferation is imminent and, with it, the danger that nuclear war fighting, albeit limited in scope, might become possible,” the authors argued in the 150-page blueprint for urgent reform of western military strategy and structures. “The first use of nuclear weapons must remain in the quiver of escalation as the ultimate instrument to prevent the use of weapons of mass destruction.”

The authors - General John Shalikashvili, the former chairman of the US joint chiefs of staff and NATO’s ex-supreme commander in Europe, General Klaus Naumann, Germany’s former top soldier and ex-chairman of NATO’s military committee, General Henk van den Breemen, a former Dutch chief of staff, Admiral Jacques Lanxade, a former French chief of staff, and Lord Inge, field marshal and ex-chief of the general staff and the defence staff in the UK - paint an alarming picture of the threats and challenges confronting the west in the post-9/11 world and deliver a withering verdict on the ability to cope.

[…]

Naumann delivered a blistering attack on his own country’s performance in Afghanistan. “The time has come for Germany to decide if it wants to be a reliable partner.” By insisting on “special rules” for its forces in Afghanistan, the Merkel government in Berlin was contributing to “the dissolution of NATO”.

Ron Asmus, head of the German Marshall Fund think-tank in Brussels and a former senior US state department official, described the manifesto as “a wake-up call”. “This report means that the core of the NATO establishment is saying we’re in trouble, that the west is adrift and not facing up to the challenges.”

And now take a look at this one from the Associated Press (two days ago):

Russia: Could Use Nuclear Weapons

MOSCOW (AP) — Russia’s military chief of staff said Saturday that Moscow could use nuclear weapons in preventive strikes to protect itself and its allies, the latest aggressive remarks from increasingly assertive Russian authorities.

Gen. Yuri Baluyevsky’s comment did not mark a policy shift, military analysts said. Amid disputes with the West over security issues, it may have been meant as a warning that Russia is prepared to use its nuclear might.

“We do not intend to attack anyone, but we consider it necessary for all our partners in the world community to clearly understand … that to defend the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Russia and its allies, military forces will be used, including preventively, including with the use of nuclear weapons,” Baluyevsky said at a military conference in a remark broadcast on state-run cable channel Vesti-24.

According to the state-run news agency RIA-Novosti, Baluyevsky added that Russia would use nuclear weapons and carry out preventive strikes only in accordance with Russia’s military doctrine.

[…]

Moscow-based military analyst Alexander Golts said that when Russia broke with stated Soviet-era policy in the 2000 doctrine and declared it could use nuclear weapons first against an aggressor, it reflected the decline of Russia’s conventional forces in the decade following the 1991 Soviet collapse.

“Baluyevsky’s statement means that, as before, we cannot count on our conventional forces to counter aggression,” Golts told Ekho Moskvy radio. “It means that as before, the main factor in containing aggression against Russia is nuclear weapons.”

Putin and other Russian officials have stressed the need to maintain a powerful nuclear deterrent and reserved the right to carry out preventive strikes. But in most of their public remarks on preventive strikes, Russian officials have not specifically mentioned nuclear weapons.

Is it my imagination, or is it getting a little cold out there?

Technorati Tags: nuclear strike, key option, pre-emptive nuclear attack, nuclear, weapons of mass destruction, radical manifesto, NATO, senior military officers, strategists, US, European Union, grand strategy, brutal world, Britain, Germany, France, Netherlands, first strike, nuclear option, indispensable instrument, nuclear-free world, active commanders, policymakers, Pentagon, secretary general, Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, NATO summit, Bucharest, proliferation, nuclear war fighting, western military strategy, John Shalikashvili, chairman, joint chiefs of staff, ex-supreme commander, Klaus Naumann, military committee, Henk van den Breemen, Dutch chief of staff, Admiral, Jacques Lanxade, French, Lord Inge, field marshal, Afghanistan, Merkel government, dissolution of NATO, state department official, Russia, Moscow, Russian authorities, Yuri Baluyevsky, policy shift, military analysts, disputes with the West, security issues, sovereignty, territorial integrity, military doctrine, Soviet-era policy, 2000 doctrine, conventional forces, Soviet collapse, nuclear deterrent

Bookmark: