First strike (nuclear strategy) facts for kids
A first strike is a surprise attack, usually with powerful weapons like nuclear bombs, meant to completely destroy an enemy's ability to fight back. If a country has the power to do this, it's called having first strike capability. The main goal is to hit the other country's nuclear weapon sites, like missile silos, submarine bases, and airfields, along with their command centers. This strategy is known as counterforce.
Contents
A Look Back: The Cold War and First Strikes
During the Cold War, a long period of tension between the NATO countries (like the US and its allies) and the Eastern Bloc (led by the Soviet Union), the idea of a first strike was a huge fear. Both sides worried the other might launch a surprise attack. New technologies and misunderstandings often made these fears worse.
Early Fears (1948–1961)
After World War II, the Soviet Union worried that the United States, which was the only country with nuclear weapons at first, would attack them. The US had many more nuclear weapons than the Soviets for a long time.
To catch up, the Soviet Union quickly developed its own nuclear bomb, testing it in 1949. The US then created even more powerful hydrogen bombs, testing one in 1952. But the Soviets soon had their own hydrogen bombs too.
Tensions grew with events like the Soviet invasion of Hungary in 1956. In the US, fears of communism were high. Then, in 1957, the Soviets launched Sputnik, the first satellite in space. This made people in the US worry that if the Soviets could launch things into orbit, they could also send bombs anywhere on Earth.
Leaders like John F. Kennedy talked about a "missile gap," suggesting the Soviets had more missiles, which wasn't true. Events like the 1960 U-2 incident (when a US spy plane was shot down over the Soviet Union) and the Berlin Crisis of 1961 made things even more tense. The Soviets also tested the incredibly powerful Tsar Bomba, the largest nuclear weapon ever detonated.
The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962)
All these tensions reached a peak in 1962 with the Cuban Missile Crisis. The Soviet Union secretly placed nuclear missiles in Cuba, very close to the US. They said they did this because the US had missiles in Turkey, and Cuba's leader, Fidel Castro, wanted to protect his country from a US invasion, like the failed Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961.
During the crisis, Fidel Castro even suggested to Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev that if the US invaded Cuba, the Soviets should launch a nuclear strike against the US. He wrote that it would be the moment "to eliminate this danger forever."
Luckily, the crisis ended peacefully. Khrushchev agreed to remove the missiles from Cuba, and Kennedy secretly agreed to remove US missiles from Turkey. Both sides realized how close they had come to a nuclear war and decided to try to reduce tensions. This led to a period of less hostility between the US and the Soviet Union.
However, Fidel Castro continued to push for tougher actions, even nuclear ones, in later years. Soviet generals later explained to him the terrible effects a nuclear war would have on Cuba, which changed his mind.
Renewed Tensions (1970s/1980s)
Tensions rose again in the late 1970s and early 1980s. The Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan and deployed new powerful missiles like the SS-20 Saber and SS-18 Satan. In response, NATO deployed its own new missiles, the Pershing II and Tomahawk.
These new missiles could hit targets very quickly, increasing fears on both sides. The Soviets worried NATO was planning an attack. Problems with early warning systems, misunderstandings, and strong words from leaders on both sides made the situation very dangerous.
In 1983, a NATO exercise called Able Archer simulated a nuclear attack on the Soviet Union. This happened at the same time the Soviets were intensely looking for signs of a real attack. This bad timing brought the world incredibly close to nuclear war, possibly even closer than the Cuban Missile Crisis.
Understanding Key Terms
- CEP (Circular Error Probable): This tells you how accurate a weapon is. If a missile has a CEP of 150 meters, it means there's a 50% chance it will land within 150 meters of its target.
- Range: This is the maximum distance a weapon can travel to hit its target.
- kt/Mt (Kiloton/Megaton): These terms measure the explosive power of nuclear weapons.
* kt stands for kilotons of TNT. One kiloton is equal to 1,000 tons of TNT. * Mt stands for megatons of TNT. One megaton is equal to 1,000,000 tons of TNT. * For example, a 20 kt nuclear bomb has the same explosive power as 20,000 tons of TNT. * Nuclear explosions also release dangerous ionizing radiation, which can harm living things and linger for some time.
Weapons for a First Strike
Early missiles weren't very accurate, so a first strike could only target very large, undefended places like bomber airfields. But as missiles became much more accurate, it became possible to hit hardened military targets like missile silos and command centers. This is because a nuclear blast's power to destroy strong structures drops quickly the further away it is. So, a very close hit is usually needed.
Here are some examples of weapons that were considered useful for a first strike:
- Pershing II MRBM: This missile was very accurate (50m CEP) and could hit targets in the European part of the Soviet Union in just 7 minutes. It was designed to hit command centers, bunkers, and missile silos. It is no longer in use.
- R-36 (SS-18 "Satan"): This Soviet missile was very powerful and accurate (220m CEP). It could carry many warheads, each capable of destroying even very strong missile silos. It was deployed in 1976 and some are still in service.
- LGM-118 Peacekeeper: Similar to the SS-18, this US missile could carry 10 warheads, each with a 300 kt yield and a CEP of 120 meters. It was deployed in the mid-1980s but is now decommissioned. Its guidance systems are now used on other missiles.
- SS-20 Saber: This Soviet missile could carry multiple warheads and was deployed in the late 1970s. It could hit NATO targets in Europe with very little warning. It is no longer in use.
Missile Defense and First Strikes
A missile defense system that could protect a whole country from a nuclear attack might make a first strike more likely. Why? Because if a country thinks it can shoot down any missiles fired back at it, it might be less afraid to launch its own attack. Luckily, such a perfect system has never been built.
However, smaller defense systems that protect specific targets, like missile fields or command centers, can actually help prevent war. They make sure a country can still fire back, even after an attack, which makes a first strike less appealing.
Other Powerful First-Strike Weapons
.jpg)
- UGM-133 Trident II: These missiles are launched from submarines and are very advanced. They can carry multiple warheads and are extremely accurate. They can travel thousands of miles and are designed to be a strong part of a country's nuclear forces.
- R-36 (SS-18 Satan) 25 Megaton variant: Some experts believed this single, huge warhead version of the SS-18 was meant for a first strike against missile silos. However, former Soviet officers say it was actually aimed at extremely strong command centers, like NORAD in Cheyenne Mountain Complex, because such targets need a massive explosion to be destroyed. This type of weapon could be used to try and take out a country's leadership, but both the US and Russia have ways to prevent this.
Stopping a First Strike
To prevent a first strike, countries use a strategy called mutual assured destruction (MAD). This means that if one country attacks with nuclear weapons, the other country will definitely strike back, causing massive damage to both. To make this threat believable, nuclear powers take steps to make their enemies doubt they could survive a first strike.
The main goal is to make an enemy think that attacking would lead to terrible results for them. This involves making their nuclear forces seem very strong and able to survive an attack, and making sure the enemy believes a counterattack would happen.
Second Strike
The most important way to stop a first strike is the threat of a second strike. This is when the country that was attacked fires back with its own nuclear weapons.
Using Submarines (SSBNs)
Nuclear-powered ballistic missile submarines (SSBNs) are considered the hardest part of a country's nuclear forces to find and destroy. They can hide deep in the ocean, move quietly, and stay underwater for a very long time. It's almost impossible for an enemy to find and destroy all of them before they can launch their missiles. So, having more of these submarines makes a first strike much riskier for an attacker.
Protecting Land-Based Missiles
Land-based missile silos can be made stronger to protect them from near misses. Also, some missiles can be placed on special launchers that move on roads or rails. This makes them harder for an enemy to target because they are not in a fixed location.
Being Ready to Respond
Countries also increase their alert levels when tensions are high. This shows a potential attacker that their enemy is ready to launch a counterattack quickly if needed. Early warning systems that detect missile launches are also very important.
Keeping Command Links Alive
Countries have special airplanes and underground bunkers that act as command centers. These are designed to survive a nuclear attack and keep leaders in touch with their nuclear forces. For example, the US has "Looking Glass" planes and bunkers like NORAD inside Cheyenne Mountain Complex.
Russia has a system called SPRN to detect missile launches. They also have a unique system called Dead Hand. This computerized system, located deep underground, can be activated if Russia fears a nuclear attack. If it detects nuclear explosions on Russian territory and loses contact with Moscow, it can give military officers the authority to launch Russia's nuclear arsenal.
Reducing Tensions
Some countries, like France, the United Kingdom, and China, focus on having just enough nuclear weapons to make sure no one would dare attack them. They don't try to "win" a nuclear war like the US and Russia sometimes did.
China aims for a "minimum credible deterrent," meaning they have enough weapons to cause unacceptable damage to an attacker, ensuring they would not be attacked. Their arsenal is believed to be enough to make sure a first strike would not go unpunished.
The United Kingdom and France also have strong nuclear forces, mainly submarine-launched missiles, to ensure they can strike back anywhere in the world. Their policies are designed to deter any nuclear attack against them or their allies.
The Problem with MIRVed Missiles
.jpg)
Land-based missiles that carry multiple warheads, called MIRVed ICBMs, are often seen as making a first strike more likely. This is because:
- They are very accurate.
- They can respond very quickly.
- One missile can carry many warheads, allowing it to destroy many targets, like an entire missile field.
When a missile can carry many warheads, it creates a situation where attacking first seems more appealing. For example, if each side has 100 missiles with 5 warheads each, an attacker could use 40 of its missiles (200 warheads) to target the enemy's 100 missiles (firing two warheads at each). This could destroy most of the enemy's missiles, leaving the attacker with many missiles still in reserve. This type of weapon was supposed to be banned by a treaty, but the treaty never fully went into effect.
The Problem with Missile Defense
Any system designed to defend against nuclear missiles can also make a first strike more likely. Here's why:
- Encourages early attack: If a country is building a missile defense system, an enemy might be encouraged to attack *before* the system is finished, to avoid being at a disadvantage later.
- Arms race: To overcome defenses, countries might just build more warheads and missiles, leading to an arms race.
- Encourages first strike: Since defenses work better against a small number of incoming missiles, a country with a defense system might be tempted to launch a first strike. This would leave the enemy with only a few missiles to fire back, which the defense system could then more easily stop. This weakens the idea of mutual assured destruction.
See also
- Dead Hand, a Soviet nuclear retaliation system
- Decapitation strike
- Second strike
- Cuban Missile Crisis
- Preemptive war
- Mutual assured destruction
- No first use
- Nuclear terrorism
|
