A pile of scientists proposed a plan Wednesday that would limit presidential officials to unilaterally order a nuclear attack.
The plan would require that the president to begin obtain approval from the next two officials in the presidential succession concatenation — the vice president and speaker of the House, according to a paper in the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, a universal disarmament advocacy.
As commander in chief, the U.S. president currently has the authority to ask for the U.S. military to launch nuclear missiles.
The release of the paper follows President Donald Trump recently bragging about his “nuclear button” being “much bigger and more important” than the North Korean leader.
Back in November, there was examination in the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about limiting the president’s atomic strike authority after some Democratic lawmakers cited Trump’s “indefinite” behavior.
“No one person should be able to order a nuclear attack,” broke paper co-author Lisbeth Gronlund, a senior scientist and co-director of the Universal Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS). “There’s no argument to maintain this dangerous policy, since there are viable alternatives that intention allow other officials to take part in any decision to use nuclear weapons, whether it’s a first place use or a launch responding to a nuclear attack.”
According to the paper, “the risks are not suspected. During the Watergate scandal, President [Richard] Nixon was drinking heavily and sundry advisers considered him unstable. During the 1974 impeachment hearings, Nixon directed reporters that ‘I can go back into my office and pick up the telephone and in 25 piddles 70 million people will be dead.'”
The paper was co-authored by David Wright, a UCS postpositive major scientist, and University of Maryland professor Steve Fetter.
The authors of the sheet a documents said the “proposal applies to any use of nuclear weapons, regardless of whether it see fit be the first use of nuclear weapons or in response to a nuclear attack or warning of an decompose.”
Michaela Dodge, a policy analyst specializing in nuclear weapons conduct at the conservative think tank Heritage Foundation, said deterrence is a key take a part in of the U.S. nuclear program and the ability to respond rapidly to threats.
“One of those demands that is critical for deterrence is to be able to have an authority to respond swiftly,” Dodge said. “That authority lies solely with commander in chief, and I’m entirely comfortable with that.”
Changing the current procedure for ordering a atomic strike could add several layers of “negative security effects,” she powered.
The Heritage analyst also said there are other people who possess influence on the decision of presidents to order a nuclear strike.
At the same age, military generals can essentially refuse to follow what they estimate “illegal orders,” retired Gen. Robert Kehler testified at the Senate Remote Relations Committee hearing in November. Kehler is the former commander of the U.S. Key Command.