WASHINGTON, D.C. – U.S. Senator Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee and the top Republican on the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, today participated in the committee’s hearing with Admiral Charles Richard, Commander of U.S. Strategic Command (STRATCOM) and General James Dickinson, Commander of U.S. Space Command (SPACECOM).

During the hearing, Sen. Fischer asked Admiral Richard about the ongoing need to modernize our nuclear deterrent given non-nuclear capabilities lack the same ability to credibly hold targets at risk, deter adversaries, and assure our allies. Their exchange highlighted the importance of emphasizing these messages to the broader public, particularly in light of the threats challenging global stability today. Finally, Sen. Fischer and Admiral Richard touched on China’s ongoing efforts to significantly expand its nuclear arsenal.

Click the image above to watch video of Sen. Fischer’s exchange

A transcript of Sen. Fischer’s exchange with Admiral Richard is below:

Senator Fischer: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Admiral, and General for being here today. One of the reasons we’ve never adopted a no first use policy or made a sole purpose declaration is the real threat of a strategic non-nuclear attack. President Obama’s 2010 Nuclear Posture Review states the following -- “There remains a narrow range of contingencies in which U.S. nuclear weapons may still play a role in deterring a conventional or CBW attack against the United States and its allies or partners. The United States is therefore not prepared at the present time to adopt a universal policy that deterring nuclear attack is the sole purpose of nuclear weapons.” Admiral Richard, chemical and biological threats are sometimes treated as an afterthought. How has the risk of major non-nuclear attack changed since 2010 and has it decreased?

Admiral Richard: Senator, first it has certainly not decreased. You are correct that often gets overlooked, at least in public discourse. I will tell you that as a part of the Nuclear Posture Review, that was looked at very closely. I look forward to the publishing of the Nuclear Posture Review, to show you what the result of that analysis was.

Senator Fischer: Thank you. Also, those who favor reducing the size of our nuclear forces often argue that non-nuclear capabilities such as space and cyber capabilities can be substituted for nuclear weapons without diminishing our ability to credibly hold targets at risk, deter adversaries and assure our allies. What are your views on this idea?

Admiral Richard: Senator, what I’d offer is, one, I applaud efforts -- that’s fundamentally you’re getting after -- some of the capabilities that are used inside “integrated deterrence.” And we applaud that effort. But I need to be clear about something here which is: There is no other capability or combination of capabilities that gets anywhere close to the demonstrated destructive potential of a nuclear weapon. That is why it’s integral to integrated deterrence. Then with that foundation, with that backstop, you then use every other capability in our disposal to deter the opponent. An important point here, when we are talking about issues between nuclear-capable, great powers it quickly becomes less about an order of battle comparison and who wins the fight and quickly becomes about who judges greater stake and who’s willing to take greater risk to get it. Integrated deterrence sets us up very well to resolve issues like that.

Senator Fischer: And our threats are only increasing. We’ve already brought up that we have two peer competitors when it comes to the threats that we face now. How do you think we can get that message across to the people of this country, so that they have a complete understanding of the threats we face and what we must do to protect this homeland and also to offer assurances to our allies?

Admiral Richard: Senator, I’d offer that our opponents’ actions are speaking to us much better than anything I can say in words. I think it's important for us to understand we don’t know how far China is going to go. And Russia is also expanding, but also we are seeing demonstrations of how you can use these capabilities coercively. We are so trained in thinking that all we do is deter, I don’t think that we fully understand or have thought about in a long time what the coercive use of these capabilities is like, and we are getting real-world demonstrations of that right now. 

Senator Fischer: Admiral, you quote China’s strategic breakout in your opening statement, and you note that “the PRC likely intend to have at least 1,000 warheads by 2030, greatly exceeding previous DOD estimates.” As concerning as that is, it only captures, I think, part of the problem. I know there’s not a lot you can say in this environment, but do you believe it’s wise to assume that China’s nuclear forces will stop expanding when they reach that point?

Admiral Richard: Senator, I’ll tell you I told my staff that whatever the time estimate that the intelligence community gives you on anything from China, divide it by two and maybe by four and you will get closer to the right answer. So, no, I don’t know that we have any idea of what the endpoint and/or speed. When I first testified here, we were questioning whether or not China would be able to double that stockpile by the end of the decade. They’re actually closing to do it on my watch, and I think we need to factor that into our calculations as we think through what we need to defend ourselves.

Senator Fischer: And as we look at China’s breakout, or we look at the continued growth of Russia’s non-strategic arsenal, obviously nuclear threats are still growing. We are not trying to match any adversary system for system. But at the same time an imbalance in forces does undermine our strategic stability. Isn’t that right? 

Admiral Richard: Yes ma’am and said another way, I think it emboldens coercion and aggression.

Senator Fischer: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

###