The Nature of Deterrence

THE NATURE OF DETERRENCE Caspar W. Weinberger During the past four years the Reagan administration has been building on the enduring strengths of our national character to revitalize America's global leadership, national morale, economic strength, and military power. In his second term President Ronald Reagan will address pressing national security questions and will consider new directions in policy. Now is an appropriate time to assess the lessons of the previous four years and, where necessary, adjust the course for the next four. In our free society national security issues are debated by the people. These debates contrast markedly with Soviet society, where the principal policy objective is to preserve the state's totalitarian power and where the decisions are made by a small ruling elite. Because free discussion is essential in a democracy, I have entered the public debate concerning defense issues. I traveled to England to debate the issue ofdeterrence at the Oxford Union and have participated in several discussions on U.S. national television. I conferred with the National Conference of Catholic Bishops as they deliberated on their pastoral letter on war and peace, responding later to the major points in that document in a talk at Fordham University. Because there are parallels between many of the bishops' principles and our nation's policy, a review of the bishops' arguments is instructive. Our national policy and the bishops' letter are both based on a "presumption in favor of peace and against war." Together we reject offensive war; together we acknowledge that all nations have "a right and even a duty to Caspar W. Weinberger is U.S. secretary of defense. 37 38 SAIS REVIEW protect their existence and freedom against an unjust aggressor."1 The bishops denounce a policy of using nuclear weapons "for the purpose of destroying population centers or other predominantly civilian targets."2 So do we. Above all, the Catholic church and our national leadership agree there would be no winner in a nuclear war—all mankind would lose. I reemphasize these parallels here because they are relevant to any discussion of national security policy, and they underscore the value of free dialogue concerning that policy. Without open dialogue, the United States cannot maintain an effective deterrent, for the key element of successful deterrence is our potential adversaries' perceptions that our deterrent is built on the will and resolve of our people. In a free society, national will can only be sustained by the full understanding and support of the people. Successful deterrence also requires that the United States maintain sufficient military capability to convince our adversaries that we can effectively respond to aggression so they understand they can gain nothing from it. In this essay, I will address this second element and the question of how much defense is necessary to continue deterring conflict and sustain America's national security. Our foremost national security objective is to preserve the independence of the United States and protect its institutions and values. There are important corollaries to this objective. In the words of President Reagan: "Achieving the fundamental goals our nation seeks in world affairs—peace, human rights, economic progress, national independence , and international stability—means supporting our friends and defending our interests. Our commitment as peacemaker is focused on these goals."3 We must achieve our fundamental goals using instruments that draw on all dimensions of our national strength—economic, political, cultural, technological, diplomatic, and military. As the president has pointed out, we cannot accomplish these goals in "splendid" isolation. Our national interests are inextricably intertwined with those of our allies and friends. Our position as the most powerful nation in the free world challenges us with a special responsibility. The United States must take the lead in promulgating democratic ideals and human rights. We must help preserve freedom for those nations that possess it and for those struggling to achieve it. In fulfilling these responsibilities, we must acknowledge 1 . National Council of Catholic Bishops, The Challenge ofPeace, God's Promise and Our Response: A Pastoral Letter on War and Peace (Washington, D.C: United States Catholic Conference, 3 May 1983), 26-27. 2.National Council of Catholic Bishops, op. cit., 46. 3.President...