The Cold War left us with an enormous reserve of nuclear weapons that we do not need any more; that we cannot use or maintain in its present condition. Nevertheless, the expert community sticks to the idea of a nuclear cover in the face of an uncertain future. These same experts now demand the creation of nuclear weapons with high terrestrial penetration power. The truth is that we do not have a coherent nuclear strategy. Before making any decision, we must first organize a national debate on the role of nuclear weapons and their contribution to our defense. The international environment has changed and we are not in the 1980’s or the 1990’s any longer.
I would like to make a few remarks in order to encourage this national debate:
  The United States must continue to possess arms to protect itself.
  Our nuclear capacities are overestimated due to the existence back in time of our arsenal.
  The possession of a significant reserve of old weapons is less important than certain improved weapons.
  I think we should integrally put our old weapons out of service and replace them with fewer new ones.
  By reducing the number of weapons we limit the chances they might fall into the bad hands.
  Russia should imitate us.
  Our new nuclear strategy should go together with the return to the Nonproliferation Treaty principles when adjusting them to the new world.
  It is no use making tests with our old weapons.
These measures will not only allow us to save resources but to defend ourselves better.

Washington Post (United States)

« Toward a Nuclear Strategy », by John J. Hamre, Washington Post, May 2, 2005.