I first came across the work of Hans Kristensen, director of the Nuclear Information Project at the Federation of American Scientists, while reporting a series for The Providence Journal on the new fleet of ballistic missile submarines due to be built by General Dynamics-Electric Boat at its Connecticut and Rhode Island shipyards. The Navy currently has 14 nuclear-armed Ohio-class submarines in service and plans to replace them with 12 Columbia-class ships. Kristensen, however, had analyzed publicly available information and found the Navy may need only eight operational subs, with an additional two in refueling, to meet the demand of its deterrence missions—a conclusion that, if acknowledged and acted upon, would mean cost savings for taxpayers and lost revenue for Electric Boat. “Of course, the Navy vehemently denies that [its submarine fleet is too large],” Kristensen later told me in an interview.
I quickly discovered Kristensen’s work—which includes the comprehensive FAS “Nuclear Notebook”—was among the most detailed and fact-based analysis on worldwide nuclear weapons arsenals available to the public. His reports are empirical and objective, to a degree that seems almost detached given the implications of the subject matter. Consider, for example, this passage from a 2017 article he co-authored with Matthew McKinzie and Theodore Postol on advancements in U.S. nuclear warheads and their potential impact on perceptions of possible nuclear scenarios: Continue reading An In-Depth Look at the U.S. Nuclear Arsenal and Modernization Program With Weapons Expert Hans Kristensen
The author Joan Didion famously wrote, “We tell ourselves stories in order to live.”
In Rhode Island and Connecticut, we tell ourselves myths about Electric Boat in order to justify building war machines.
There are the obvious myths: that a fleet of nuclear-armed submarines costing upwards of $104-billion will be a force for peace in the world; that executives at parent company General Dynamics gobbling up millions of dollars in compensation each year on the taxpayer dime are “patriotic”; and that some other community will build these weapons systems anyway if Southern New England doesn’t—so why shouldn’t we?
The fourth myth, which might be the most rich, is that the top brass at General Dynamics-Electric Boat actually care about our community, that they’re people committed to providing us with “good middle class jobs,” the kind of “blue collar” work that still provides an income you can raise a family on. Continue reading The Myth of General Dynamics-Electric Boat and Its ‘Middle Class Jobs’
[NOTE: A version of this opinion article was published on RIFuture.org.]
There are many people on the left who think “Russiagate” merits wall-to-wall news coverage and MSNBC’s near-singular focus.
I’m not one of them. In fact, I’m beginning to find the rhetoric coming out of the Democratic Party on Russia, with its comparisons to the deadly attacks of 9/11 and Pearl Harbor, more than misplaced. They’re irresponsible and frightening. Continue reading Jingoism From the So-Called Left
[NOTE: This opinion article was published simultaneously on RIFuture.com.]
A couple months back, I was emailed by South County, R.I., activist Jonathan Daly-LaBelle, who wanted to know if I’d seen Rep. Jim Langevin’s press release announcing the rationale behind his recent yes vote on a nearly $700-billion Pentagon budget.
It “is really quite disturbing,” Daly-LaBelle wrote.
No argument from me on this one.
Langevin, Democrat of Rhode Island’s Second Congressional District, has embraced a bizarre and increasingly dangerous stance on “defense” issues in recent years, and that attitude was on full display in his prepared statement.
Among his many points in support of a monstrous Pentagon budget that will go unaudited, as it always does, and undoubtedly lead to waste, was the contention that Congress must make certain “our nation’s warfighters are never sent into a fair fight.”
But maybe Langevin should consider asking all those innocent civilians in the numerous countries we’ve dropped bombs on since 9/11 what it feels like to be on the receiving end of an “unfair fight.” Continue reading Jack Reed, Jim Langevin, and the Defense Industry