LGM-35 Sentinel
{{Use dmy dates|date=September 2018}}
{{Infobox weapon
| is_missile = yes
| name = LGM-35 Sentinel
| image = LGM-35A Render.png
| caption = Concept rendering of the LGM-35A
| origin = United States
| type = Intercontinental ballistic missile
| used_by = United States
| manufacturer = Northrop Grumman
| unit_cost =
| propellant =
| production_date =
| engine = Three-stage solid-fuel rocket
| engine_power =
| weight =
| length =
| height =
| diameter =
| wingspan =
| speed =
| vehicle_range =
| ceiling =
| altitude =
| guidance =
| accuracy =
| detonation = Ground-burst and/or air-burst fusing modes
| launch_platform = Missile silo
| filling = W87 mod 0 thermonuclear warhead ({{convert|300|ktonTNT|TJ}})
W87 mod 1 thermonuclear warhead ({{convert|475|ktonTNT|TJ}})
}}
The LGM-35 Sentinel, also known as the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD), is a land-based intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) system under development for the United States Air Force.{{Cite web |last=Eaves |first=Elisabeth |date=8 February 2021 |title=Why is America getting a new $100 billion nuclear weapon? |url=https://thebulletin.org/2021/02/why-is-america-getting-a-new-100-billion-nuclear-weapon/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210220023556/https://thebulletin.org/2021/02/why-is-america-getting-a-new-100-billion-nuclear-weapon/ |archive-date=20 February 2021 |access-date=10 May 2021 |website=Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists}}{{Cite web |title=Air Force's new intercontinental ballistic missile system has a name: Sentinel |url=https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2990069/air-forces-new-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-system-has-a-name-sentinel/ |access-date=2022-04-05 |website=Air Force |date=5 April 2022 |archive-date=5 April 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220405212143/https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2990069/air-forces-new-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-system-has-a-name-sentinel/ |url-status=live}} It is intended to replace all 450 Minuteman III missiles beginning in 2029, with service expected through 2075. The Minuteman III missiles are currently deployed in North Dakota, Wyoming, Colorado, Montana, and Nebraska.{{Cite web|last=Johnson|first=Benji|date=10 November 2020|title=Ground Based Strategic Deterrent|url=https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11681/3|access-date=10 November 2020|website=Congressional Research Service|archive-date=10 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210510132804/https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11681/3|url-status=live}}
In 2020, the Department of the Air Force awarded Northrop Grumman a sole-source contract to develop the Sentinel after Boeing withdrew from the bidding process. Subcontractors include Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, Bechtel, Honeywell, Aerojet Rocketdyne, Parsons, Textron, and others.{{Cite web|last=Kaplan|first=Fred|date=10 March 2021|title=It's Time for Biden to Stand Up to Tom Cotton and the Congressional Missile Caucus|url=https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/03/icbm-gbsd-missile-lobby.html|access-date=10 May 2021|website=Slate Magazine|archive-date=10 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210510133850/https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/03/icbm-gbsd-missile-lobby.html|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|title=Ground Based Strategic Deterrent|url=https://www.bechtel.com/projects/ground-based-strategic-deterrent/|access-date=14 May 2021|website=Bechtel Corporate|archive-date=14 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514023134/https://www.bechtel.com/projects/ground-based-strategic-deterrent/|url-status=live}}{{Cite web |date=16 September 2019 |title=Northrop Grumman selects subcontractors for new ICBM missile system |url=https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2019/09/16/Northrop-Grumman-selects-subcontractors-for-new-ICBM-missile-system/6561568654531/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210519222144/https://www.upi.com/Defense-News/2019/09/16/Northrop-Grumman-selects-subcontractors-for-new-ICBM-missile-system/6561568654531/ |archive-date=19 May 2021 |access-date=19 May 2021 |website=UPI}}
On 19 January 2024, the Air Force announced that program costs had increased to over $125 billion, significantly exceeding the initial $77.7 billion estimate, and that deployment would be delayed by two years. The cost and schedule overrun was classified as "critical", triggering a Nunn–McCurdy review. Under Nunn–McCurdy, programs in critical status are presumed terminated unless the Department of Defense certifies that they are essential to national security and no less costly alternatives exist. It was determined that the Sentinel program met these criteria, allowing it to continue, however the Air Force was directed to implement cost controls. The review, released on 8 July 2024, also included a revised cost estimate, putting total acquisition costs at $140.9 billion.{{cite web |url=https://www.defense.gov/News/Releases/Release/Article/3829985/department-of-defense-announces-results-of-sentinel-nunn-mccurdy-review/ |title=Department of Defense Announces Results of Sentinel Nunn-McCurdy Review |work=Department of Defense |date=8 July 2024 |access-date=10 July 2024}}
The Air Force plans to procure 634 Sentinel missiles, along with 25 additional missiles for development and testing, to support the deployment of 400 operational missiles. The program also includes modernization of 450 silos and more than 600 facilities across approximately {{convert|40000|sqmi}}.[https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11681 Defense Primer: LGM-35A Sentinel Intercontinental Ballistic Missile] However, it was later determined that existing Minuteman silos could not be adapted for the Sentinel, requiring new silos to be constructed at significant additional expense not accounted for in the prior acquisition costs.{{Cite web |last=Losey |first=Stephen |date=2025-05-06 |title=Sentinel nuclear missiles will need new silos, Air Force says |url=https://www.defensenews.com/air/2025/05/06/sentinel-nuclear-missiles-will-need-new-silos-air-force-says/ |access-date=2025-05-09 |website=Defense News |language=en}}
Name
According to the United States Air Force website,{{Cite web |title=LGM-30G Minuteman III |url=https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104466/lgm-30g-minuteman-iii/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231209041757/https://www.af.mil/About-Us/Fact-Sheets/Display/Article/104466/lgm-30g-minuteman-iii/ |archive-date=9 December 2023 |website=U.S. Air Force}} the L in LGM is the Department of Defense designation for silo-launched; G means surface attack; and "M" stands for guided missile.
History
In 2010, the ICBM Coalition, legislators from states that house nuclear missiles, told President Obama they would not support ratification of the New START treaty with Russia unless Obama agreed to revamp the US nuclear triad: nuclear weapons that could be launched from land, sea, and air.{{Cite web|last=Hewitt|first=Kate|date=2019-01-17|title=Experts discuss the politics of New START and strategic nuclear modernization|url=https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/01/17/experts-discuss-the-politics-of-new-start-and-strategic-nuclear-modernization/|access-date=2021-05-10|website=Brookings|language=en-US|archive-date=10 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210510141137/https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/01/17/experts-discuss-the-politics-of-new-start-and-strategic-nuclear-modernization/|url-status=live}} In a written statement, President Obama agreed to "modernize or replace" all three legs of the triad.
A request for proposal for development and maintenance of a next-generation nuclear ICBM was made by the US Air Force Nuclear Weapons Center in July 2016. The GBSD would replace the Minuteman III, which was first deployed in 1970, in the land-based portion of the US nuclear triad.{{cite web |date=4 August 2016 |title=Boeing Ready to Design Next Generation of US Nuclear Missiles |url=http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Boeing_Ready_to_Design_Next_Generation_of_US_Nuclear_Missiles_999.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160806202402/http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Boeing_Ready_to_Design_Next_Generation_of_US_Nuclear_Missiles_999.html |archive-date=6 August 2016 |access-date=27 September 2018 |website=Space Daily}} The new missiles, to be phased in over a decade from the late 2020s, are estimated over a fifty-year life cycle to cost around $264 billion. Boeing and Northrop Grumman competed for the contract.{{cite web |last=Watkins |first=Thomas |date=25 September 2016 |title=US Air Force set to replace intercontinental nuke arsenal |url=http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US_Air_Force_set_to_replace_intercontinental_nuke_arsenal_999.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160928160652/http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/US_Air_Force_set_to_replace_intercontinental_nuke_arsenal_999.html |archive-date=28 September 2016 |access-date=27 September 2018 |website=Space Daily}}
In August 2017, the Air Force awarded three-year development contracts to Boeing and Northrop Grumman for $349 million and $329 million, respectively.{{Cite news |last=Gregg |first=Aaron |date=22 August 2017 |title=Pentagon narrows competition for the next big U.S. nuclear missile deterrent |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/08/21/pentagon-narrows-competition-for-the-next-big-u-s-nuclear-missile-deterrent/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200424130129/https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2017/08/21/pentagon-narrows-competition-for-the-next-big-u-s-nuclear-missile-deterrent/ |archive-date=24 April 2020 |access-date=7 January 2024 |newspaper=The Washington Post}} One of these companies was to be selected to produce a ground-based nuclear ICBM in 2020. The GBSD program was initially expected to enter service in 2029 and remain active until at least 2075.{{cite web |last=Carlson |first=Stephen |date=22 August 2017 |title=Boeing, Northrop Grumman receive development contracts for new ICBM |url=http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Boeing_Northrop_Grumman_receive_development_contracts_for_new_ICBM_999.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170823205723/http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Boeing_Northrop_Grumman_receive_development_contracts_for_new_ICBM_999.html |archive-date=23 August 2017 |access-date=27 September 2018 |website=Space Daily}}
On 25 July 2019, Boeing announced it would not place a bid for the program, citing Northrop's recent acquisition of Orbital ATK (now Northrop Grumman Innovation Systems), Boeing's supplier of solid rocket motors. Northrop signed an agreement to firewall Boeing's proprietary data after acquiring Orbital ATK.{{cite web |author=Weisgerber |first=Marcus |date=25 July 2019 |title=Boeing: $85B Competition to Build New ICBMs Favors Northrop Grumman |url=https://www.defenseone.com/business/2019/07/boeing-85b-competition-build-new-icbms-favors-northrop-grumman/158695/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190728153213/https://www.defenseone.com/business/2019/07/boeing-85b-competition-build-new-icbms-favors-northrop-grumman/158695/ |archive-date=28 July 2019 |access-date=8 August 2019 |website=Defense One}} The Air Force subsequently halted funding for the Boeing project, leaving Northrop Grumman as the sole bidder for the contract by October 2019.{{Cite news |last=Gregg |first=Aaron |date=22 October 2019 |title=Air Force halts funding for Boeing's ballistic missile replacement |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/10/22/air-force-halts-funding-boeings-ballistic-missile-replacement/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220808073643/https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2019/10/22/air-force-halts-funding-boeings-ballistic-missile-replacement/ |archive-date=8 August 2022 |newspaper=The Washington Post}}
In December 2019, it was announced that Northrop Grumman won the competition to build the future ICBM. Northrop won by default, as their bid was the only one left to be considered for the GBSD program. The Air Force said that they would "proceed with an aggressive and effective sole-source negotiation" in reference to Northrop's bid.{{cite web |author=Erwin |first=Sandra |date=14 December 2019 |title=Northrop Grumman wins competition to build future ICBM, by default |url=https://spacenews.com/northrop-grumman-wins-competition-to-build-future-icbm-by-default/ |access-date=15 December 2019 |website=Space News}}
On 8 September 2020, the Department of the Air Force awarded Northrop Grumman a $13.3 billion contract to develop the GBSD intercontinental ballistic missile.{{Cite web |last=Erwin |first=Sandra |date=8 September 2020 |title=Northrop Grumman receives $13.3 billion contract to develop next-generation ICBM |url=https://spacenews.com/northrop-grumman-receives-13-3-billion-contract-to-develop-next-generation-icbm/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210901022851/https://spacenews.com/northrop-grumman-receives-13-3-billion-contract-to-develop-next-generation-icbm/ |archive-date=1 September 2021 |access-date=10 September 2020 |website=Space News}} Work on the GBSD missiles will be done in Roy and Promontory, Utah; Huntsville and Montgomery, Alabama; Colorado Springs, Colorado; Bellevue, Nebraska; San Diego and Woodland Hills, California; Vandenberg Space Force Base, California; Chandler, Arizona; Annapolis Junction, Maryland; and other locations.{{Cite web |date=9 September 2020 |title=Northrop Grumman to design next-generation intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) in $13.3 billion deal |url=https://www.militaryaerospace.com/sensors/article/14183010/intercontinental-ballistic-missile-icbm-ground-based-strategic-deterrent-gbsd |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514022556/https://www.militaryaerospace.com/sensors/article/14183010/intercontinental-ballistic-missile-icbm-ground-based-strategic-deterrent-gbsd |archive-date=14 May 2021 |access-date=14 May 2021 |website=Military Aerospace}}
In April 2022, the GBSD's official designation was announced: The LGM-35A Sentinel.{{Cite web|title=Air Force's new intercontinental ballistic missile system has a name: Sentinel|url=https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2990069/air-forces-new-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-system-has-a-name-sentinel/|access-date=2022-04-06|website=U.S. Air Force|date=5 April 2022 |language=en|archive-date=5 April 2022|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220405212143/https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2990069/air-forces-new-intercontinental-ballistic-missile-system-has-a-name-sentinel/}} In April 2023, the USAF formally began seeking vendor information preliminary to issuing a request for proposal (RFP) for the Next-generation reentry vehicle (NGRV).{{Cite web |last=Marrow |first=Michael |date=7 April 2023 |title=Air Force seeks industry input for next-gen ICBM reentry vehicle |url=https://breakingdefense.com/2023/04/air-force-seeks-industry-input-for-next-gen-icbm-reentry-vehicle/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231103102219/https://breakingdefense.com/2023/04/air-force-seeks-industry-input-for-next-gen-icbm-reentry-vehicle/ |archive-date=3 November 2023 |website=Breaking Defense}}
=Delays and cost overruns=
On January 19, 2024, the USAF announced that the LGM-35A Sentinel program will exceed its original budget estimate of $95.3 billion by at least 37%, pushing the total cost to over $125 billion, and the service entry will be delayed by two years.{{Cite web|last=Tirpak|first=John A.|title=New ICBM Has ‘Critical’ Cost and Schedule Overruns, Needs SecDef Certification to Continue|url=https://www.airandspaceforces.com/new-icbm-critical-cost-schedule-overruns/|access-date=24 May 2024|website=Air&Space Forces Magazine|publisher=Air & Space Forces Association|date=22 January 2024 |language=en|archive-date=21 January 2024|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240121123641/https://www.airandspaceforces.com/new-icbm-critical-cost-schedule-overruns/}} This estimate was raised to $140.9 billion in July 2024 following a Nunn-McCurdy review. The Program Acquisition Unit Cost (PAUC) has risen from an estimated $118 million per missile in 2020 to approximately $162 million {{as of|2023|12|lc=on}}. This increase is primarily due to rising costs in command and control systems and missile silo infrastructure.
Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall, speaking at a Washington, DC think tank in November 2023, explained that the program had encountered "unknown unknowns" and was due for a "re-baseline." He noted, "As we get more into the program, as we understand more deeply what we're actually going to have to do, we're finding some things that are going to cost money. There's no question about that."{{Cite web|last=Rosenberg|first=Zach|title=LGM-35A Sentinel missile cost climbs, schedule slips|url=https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/lgm-35a-sentinel-missile-cost-climbs-schedule-slips|access-date=24 May 2024|website=Janes|date=22 January 2024 |language=en|archive-date=24 May 2024|url-status=live|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20240524012405/https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/lgm-35a-sentinel-missile-cost-climbs-schedule-slips}}
Warhead
In March 2019, the W87 Mod 1 (W87-1) thermonuclear warhead was selected for GBSD, replacing the W78 warhead currently used on the Minuteman III.{{cite web |date=8 March 2019 |title=W87-1 Modification Program |url=https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/03/f60/2019-03-08-FACTSHEET-W87-1.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191231172209/https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2019/03/f60/2019-03-08-FACTSHEET-W87-1.pdf |archive-date=31 December 2019 |access-date=8 March 2020}} It was planned for GBSD to deploy in 2028, with W87-0 warheads initially being fitted to the system and W87-1 warheads being fitted from 2030 onward. This affords the Air Force a small amount of flexibility if the W87-1 is delayed.{{Cite web |last1=Klotz |first1=Frank G. |last2=Evans |first2=Alexandra T. |date=2022 |title=Modernizing the U.S. Nuclear Triad: The Rationale for a New Intercontinental Ballistic Missile |url=https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/perspectives/PEA1400/PEA1434-1/RAND_PEA1434-1.pdf |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220206053934/https://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/perspectives/PEA1400/PEA1434-1/RAND_PEA1434-1.pdf |archive-date=6 February 2022 |access-date=30 March 2022 |website=RAND Corporation |page=21}}
The completion of the first plutonium pit for the W87-1 was announced in October 2024 by the National Nuclear Security Administration, after a 35-year-long hiatus.{{Cite web |date=2 October 2024 |title=NNSA completes and diamond-stamps first plutonium pit for W87-1 warhead |url=https://www.energy.gov/nnsa/articles/nnsa-completes-and-diamond-stamps-first-plutonium-pit-w87-1-warhead |access-date=14 October 2024 |website=National Nuclear Security Administration}}
The Air Force intends to deploy a single warhead on each missile. The Congressional Research Service notes that the high throw-weight of the missile could provide options for it to carry several MIRVs or penetration aids at a future time, if prospective enemies develop credible anti-ballistic missile defenses.
Testing
GBSD testing is expected to occur mainly at Hill Air Force Base in Utah, and at Vandenberg Space Force Base (VSFB) in California, with missile launches from VSFB over the Pacific Ocean. Additional testing is expected to be conducted at the Army's Dugway Proving Ground in Utah and the Ronald Reagan Ballistic Missile Defense Test Site in the Marshall Islands.{{Cite web|title=Air Force releases environmental study on Ground Based Strategic Deterrent ICBM recapitali|url=https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2509117/air-force-releases-environmental-study-on-ground-based-strategic-deterrent-icbm/|access-date=2021-05-14|website=U.S. Air Force|date=19 February 2021 |language=en-US|archive-date=14 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514030928/https://www.af.mil/News/Article-Display/Article/2509117/air-force-releases-environmental-study-on-ground-based-strategic-deterrent-icbm/|url-status=live}}
On 7 July 2022,{{cite web |last=Scully |first=Janene |url=https://www.noozhawk.com/article/missile_test_ends_in_explosion_seconds_after_launch_from_vandenberg_sfb |title=Missile Test Ends in Explosion Seconds After Launch from Vandenberg SFB |work=Noozhawk |date=7 July 2022 |access-date=7 July 2022 |archive-date=7 July 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220707082427/https://www.noozhawk.com/article/missile_test_ends_in_explosion_seconds_after_launch_from_vandenberg_sfb |url-status=live }} a Minotaur II+ rocket launched from Vandenberg TP-01 for a suborbital reentry vehicle (Mk21A reentry vehicle belonging to AFNWC) demonstration mission for the future LGM-35A Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile.{{cite web |last=Martinez-Pogue |first=Jade |url=https://keyt.com/news/santa-maria-north-county/2022/07/06/test-rocket-launch-scheduled-from-vandenberg-space-force-base-thursday-morning/ |title=Test rocket launch scheduled from Vandenberg Space Force Base Thursday morning |work=KEYT-TV |date=6 July 2022 |access-date=6 July 2022 |archive-date=6 July 2022 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220706233724/https://keyt.com/news/santa-maria-north-county/2022/07/06/test-rocket-launch-scheduled-from-vandenberg-space-force-base-thursday-morning/ |url-status=live }}
Debate
= Pro =
Supporters of the GBSD include the Heritage Foundation, former Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin, former Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and members of Congress in the "ICBM Coalition."{{Cite web|title=Senate Coalition Highlights Value of America's Nuclear Missiles {{!}} U.S. Senator John Hoeven of North Dakota|url=https://www.hoeven.senate.gov/news/news-releases/senate-coalition-highlights-value-of-americas-nuclear-missiles|access-date=2021-05-14|website=www.hoeven.senate.gov|language=en|archive-date=14 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514031538/https://www.hoeven.senate.gov/news/news-releases/senate-coalition-highlights-value-of-americas-nuclear-missiles|url-status=live}}{{Cite web |date=20 December 2019 |title=Supporting Voices: Nuclear Triad |url=https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/sentinel/nuclear-triad-supporting-voices |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20231002172330/https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/sentinel/nuclear-triad-supporting-voices |archive-date=2 October 2023 |access-date=14 May 2021 |website=Northrop Grumman}} They argue that the current ICBMs, first introduced in the 1970s, have had their life extended long enough and need to be replaced with a modular system in which components are easier to replace or update. In defending the importance of land-based missiles, supporters say they are the least expensive leg of the nuclear triad because they do not necessitate large maintenance crews or incur expensive refueling costs, like nuclear-powered submarines. Additionally, they argue land-based missiles are visible reminders that the US can strike back in the event of a nuclear attack, thus making them essential to nuclear deterrence.{{Cite web|last=Morrison|first=Tim|title=The Case for Modernization|url=https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2021/01/20/gbsd_the_case_for_modernization_so_obvious_even_two_think_tankers_get_it_657204.html|website=Real Clear Defense|date=20 January 2021 |access-date=10 May 2021|archive-date=22 January 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210122074542/https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2021/01/20/gbsd_the_case_for_modernization_so_obvious_even_two_think_tankers_get_it_657204.html|url-status=live}}
In its annual 2021 Threat Assessment, the US Intelligence community said China was planning to double its arsenal of nuclear weapons over the next ten years in "the most rapid expansion in its history." It also warned that Russia may expand and modernize its nuclear arsenal.{{Cite news |last=Ignatius |first=David |date=6 May 2021 |title=Opinion {{!}} The wizards of Armageddon may be back |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/06/wizards-armageddon-may-be-back/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210522074505/https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/05/06/wizards-armageddon-may-be-back/ |archive-date=22 May 2021 |access-date=10 May 2021 |newspaper=Washington Post |language=en-US |issn=0190-8286}}
One of the main supporters of the GBSD is Senator Jon Tester (D-MT), Chair of the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense. In a March 21, 2021, interview with Defense News, Tester said, "As of right now, I think it's important that we move forward with the GBSD because I believe there's still an important deterrent."{{Cite web |last=Gould |first=Joe |date=1 March 2021 |title=New Senate defense appropriations chairman talks nuclear modernization, defense cuts and earmarks |url=https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2021/03/01/senate-defense-appropriations-chair-talks-nuclear-modernization-defense-cuts-and-earmarks/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20210301215945/https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2021/03/01/senate-defense-appropriations-chair-talks-nuclear-modernization-defense-cuts-and-earmarks/ |archive-date=1 March 2021 |access-date=10 May 2021 |website=Defense News |language=en-US}} Jennifer Granholm, Secretary of Energy in the Biden administration, told the press on April 9, 2021, "We have to keep and maintain the stockpile to make sure that it is safe and effective, and we will continue to do that to ensure that we can deter nuclear aggression from other countries."{{Cite web|last=Demarest|first=Colin|title=Modernization of U.S. nuclear weapons is a must, energy secretary says at White House|url=https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/savannah-river-site/modernization-of-u-s-nuclear-weapons-is-a-must-energy-secretary-says-at-white-house/article_2a418e62-989b-11eb-90a9-a7c3604a2446.html|access-date=2021-10-17|website=Post and Courier|date=8 April 2021 |language=en|archive-date=17 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211017030918/https://www.postandcourier.com/aikenstandard/news/savannah-river-site/modernization-of-u-s-nuclear-weapons-is-a-must-energy-secretary-says-at-white-house/article_2a418e62-989b-11eb-90a9-a7c3604a2446.html|url-status=live}}
= Con =
GBSD critics include former Secretary of Defense William Perry; the late Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon Papers whistleblower and author of The Doomsday Machine: Confessions of a Nuclear War Planner;{{Cite web|title=BOOK REVIEW: Daniel Ellsberg's Essential Truths About Our Nuclear Age {{!}} Arms Control Association|url=https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2018-03/book-reviews/book-review-daniel-ellsberg%E2%80%99s-essential-truths-about-our-nuclear-age|access-date=2021-05-10|website=www.armscontrol.org|archive-date=11 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210511090138/https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2018-03/book-reviews/book-review-daniel-ellsberg%E2%80%99s-essential-truths-about-our-nuclear-age|url-status=live}}{{Cite web|last=Kaplan|first=Fred|date=2017-12-04|title=Daniel Ellsberg's Memoir About Life as a Nuclear War Planner Would Be Terrifying Even if Trump Weren't President|url=https://slate.com/culture/2017/12/the-doomsday-machine-daniel-ellsbergs-sobering-new-memoir-about-life-as-a-nuclear-war-planner.html|access-date=2021-05-10|website=Slate Magazine|language=en|archive-date=10 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210510201139/https://slate.com/culture/2017/12/the-doomsday-machine-daniel-ellsbergs-sobering-new-memoir-about-life-as-a-nuclear-war-planner.html|url-status=live}} the Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL); the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS); the Federation of American Scientists (FAS); and Peace Action. They argue that the new missiles would be not only costly, but also dangerous, increasing the risk of accidentally launching a nuclear war.{{Cite web |author=Ohlbaum |first=Diana |date=4 May 2021 |title=Cancel the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent |url=https://www.fcnl.org/updates/2021-05/cancel-ground-based-strategic-deterrent |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210510154956/https://www.fcnl.org/updates/2021-05/cancel-ground-based-strategic-deterrent |archive-date=10 May 2021 |access-date=10 May 2021 |website=Friends Committee On National Legislation |language=en}} Critics say that the targeting of ICBM silos, which are supposed to act like a sponge drawing nuclear weapons to deplete Russia's nuclear power, could result in the deaths of more than 10 million people. Ellsberg and author Norman Solomon argue that peace groups must oppose not only the GBSD but also the entire land-based leg of the nuclear triad to reduce the threat of an accidental nuclear war.{{Cite news|last1=Ellsberg|first1=Daniel|last2=Solomon|first2=Norman|date=2021-10-16|title=To Avoid Armageddon, Don't Modernize Missiles—Eliminate Them|journal=The Nation|language=en-US|url=https://www.thenation.com/article/world/eliminate-nuclear-missiles/|access-date=2021-10-17|issn=0027-8378|archive-date=17 October 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211017030444/https://www.thenation.com/article/world/eliminate-nuclear-missiles/|url-status=live}}
Physicist David Wright, former co-director of the UCS Global Security Program, in his report Rethinking Land-Based Nuclear Missiles, writes that submarine-launched ballistic missiles (SLBMs) are as accurate, if not more, than land-based missiles, and are "virtually undetectable," making the ICBMs not only obsolete but also sitting ducks in the five states that house ICBMs.{{Cite web |date=22 June 2020 |title=ICBMs are unnecessary, according to Union of Concerned Scientists |url=https://www.ucsusa.org/about/news/icbms-are-unnecessary-according-union-concerned-scientists |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210511211943/https://www.ucsusa.org/about/news/icbms-are-unnecessary-according-union-concerned-scientists |archive-date=11 May 2021 |access-date=10 May 2021 |website=Union of Concerned Scientists |language=en}} Wright concludes that the vulnerability of ICBMs has prompted the Air Force to keep them on high alert, which is dangerous and could trigger a nuclear war. According to William Hartung, author of Prophets of War: Lockheed Martin and the Making of the Military-Industrial Complex, a president would have only minutes to decide whether to launch ICBMs in a crisis so that the missiles would not be destroyed in a first strike.{{Cite web |last=Hartung |first=William D. |date=14 April 2020 |title=Now isn't the time to push for nuclear modernization |url=https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/21/now-isnt-the-time-to-push-for-nuclear-modernization/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20200421125400/https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/commentary/2020/04/21/now-isnt-the-time-to-push-for-nuclear-modernization/ |archive-date=21 April 2020 |access-date=13 May 2021 |website=Defense News |language=en-US}}
Polling
In 2020, the Program for Public Consultation at the University of Maryland, issued a report entitled Common Ground of the American People, which was a compilation of studies conducted over the previous five years, collecting data from nearly 86,000 individuals who were polled on the GBSD. Sixty-one percent of Americans–including both Democratic and Republican majorities–said they supported phasing out the United States' 400 land-based intercontinental ballistic missiles.{{Cite web |last=Korda |first=Matt |date=12 August 2020 |title=Democrats And Republicans Agree: Phase Out Land-Based Nuclear Missiles |url=https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewkorda/2020/08/12/democrats-and-republicans-agree-phase-out-land-based-nuclear-missiles/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210514021613/https://www.forbes.com/sites/matthewkorda/2020/08/12/democrats-and-republicans-agree-phase-out-land-based-nuclear-missiles/ |archive-date=14 May 2021 |access-date=14 May 2021 |website=Forbes |language=en}}
Another 2020 poll conducted by the Federation of American Scientists and ReThink Media found a majority of both Republicans and Democrats favored alternative solutions to the GBSD, including extending the life of the Minuteman III ICBM. Over 800 registered voters were surveyed, with an oversampling of 200 registered voters in ICBM states: Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska and Wyoming. When respondents were asked, "What do you think the government should do about ICBMs?", 30 percent favored updating existing ICBMs rather than replacing them, 26 percent supported the GBSD, 20 percent preferred eliminating the ICBMs and 10 percent supported abolishing all nuclear weapons.{{Cite web |last=Mehta |first=Aaron |date=5 February 2021 |title=Majority of voters support ICBM replacement alternatives, new poll finds |url=https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2021/02/05/majority-of-voters-support-icbm-replacement-alternatives-new-poll-finds/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://archive.today/20210207052836/https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2021/02/05/majority-of-voters-support-icbm-replacement-alternatives-new-poll-finds/ |archive-date=7 February 2021 |access-date=13 May 2021 |website=Defense News |language=en-US}}
According to a 2021 survey commissioned by the Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies, an organization funded by the top weapons manufacturers,{{Cite web |title=Our Supporters |url=https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/our-supporters/ |access-date=2023-03-30 |website=Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies |language=en-US |archive-date=30 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230330132356/https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/our-supporters/ |url-status=live }} the majority of voters believe that nuclear deterrence capability should be one of the highest priorities for the Department of Defense, with a majority also supporting modernization efforts.{{Cite web |last=Gunzinger |first=Kamilla |date=15 September 2021 |title=Understanding American Voters' Sentiment on Strategic Nuclear Deterrence |url=https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/understanding-american-voters-sentiment-on-national-security-maintaining-a-modern-strategic-nuclear-deterrence-posture/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220214180145/https://mitchellaerospacepower.org/understanding-american-voters-sentiment-on-national-security-maintaining-a-modern-strategic-nuclear-deterrence-posture/ |archive-date=14 February 2022 |access-date=18 March 2022 |website=Mitchell Institute for Aerospace Studies |language=en-US}} The survey asked more than 2,000 voters for their views on national security and nuclear arms. Eighty-one percent of survey respondents preferred the security benefits of the United States' ground-based nuclear capabilities more than the cost savings of removing these capabilities. When told the current Minuteman III ICBM system is over 50 years old, the majority of respondents said the ICBMs should be replaced by a modern system, compared to 23 percent who said the ICBMs should be refurbished to extend their current life. Just five percent indicated an opinion that they should be eliminated entirely. When informed that Russia and China have modernized their nuclear arsenals, support for replacing Minuteman III with a modern ICBM system rose to 65 percent, compared to only 15 percent in favor of refurbishing.{{Cite web |last=Hadley |first=Greg |date=15 September 2021 |title=Survey Finds Broad Public Support for Nuclear Deterrence, Modernization |url=https://www.airandspaceforces.com/survey-finds-broad-public-support-for-nuclear-deterrence-modernization/ |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230806142027/https://www.airandspaceforces.com/survey-finds-broad-public-support-for-nuclear-deterrence-modernization/ |archive-date=6 August 2023 |access-date=18 March 2022 |website=Air & Space Forces Magazine |language=en-US}}
ICBM Coalition
The ICBM Coalition in Congress, which lobbies for the GBSD, was able to limit the reduction of deployed land-based missiles to 50 in the New Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (New START).{{Cite web|title=Inside the ICBM Lobby: Special Interests Or the National Interest? {{!}} Arms Control Association|url=https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2021-05/features/inside-icbm-lobby-special-interests-national-interest#endnote09|access-date=2021-05-19|website=www.armscontrol.org|archive-date=19 May 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210519215823/https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2021-05/features/inside-icbm-lobby-special-interests-national-interest#endnote09|url-status=live}} As of May 2021, membership in the coalition included senators from states that will either house or develop the proposed GBSD missiles: Co-Chair, Sen. John Hoeven (R-ND); Co-Chair, Sen. Jon Tester (D-MT); Sen. John Barrasso (R-WY); Sen. Steve Daines (R-MT); Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT); Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD).{{Cite web|title=Senate ICBM Coalition - Summary from LegiStorm|url=https://www.legistorm.com/organization/summary/123159/Senate_ICBM_Coalition.html|access-date=2021-05-20|website=www.legistorm.com}}
Tester serves as Chair of the Senate Appropriations defense subcommittee. During a spring 2021 event hosted by the Washington, D.C.–based Advanced Nuclear Weapons Alliance, Tester said he was committed to keeping the GBSD "on track" though added there will be debate about the proposed new missiles during the 2022 defense appropriations process.{{Cite web |last=Leone |first=Dan |date=2 April 2021 |title=Tester Says He Will Keep GBSD "On Track;" Ex-Obama Official Says GBSD 'Vulnerable' |url=https://www.exchangemonitor.com/tester-says-will-keep-gbsd-track-ex-obama-official-says-gbsd-vulnerable-2/?printmode=1 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210519220412/https://www.exchangemonitor.com/tester-says-will-keep-gbsd-track-ex-obama-official-says-gbsd-vulnerable-2/?printmode=1 |archive-date=19 May 2021 |access-date=19 May 2021 |website=ExchangeMonitor |language=en-US}}
According to the Arms Control Association, Caucus Senators received the following contributions from military contractors from 2012-2020: Romney ($645,000); Tester ($102,360); Barasso ($89,000); Daines ($85,948); Enzi ($68,500); Cramer ($49,593). In total, military contractors have donated $1.2 million to the current members of the Senate ICBM Coalition and more than $15 million to the 64 members of the influential committees, the Senate and House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittees and the Senate and House Appropriations defense subcommittees, that can decide the fate of ICBM legislation. ICBM contractors are also engaged in lobbying representatives in Congress, with corporate backers of GBSD employing 380 lobbyists, according to the Arms Control Association.
See also
- Intercontinental ballistic missile.
- {{sclass|Columbia|submarine|2}}, a SSBN also scheduled to enter service around 2031 to replace the aging {{sclass|Ohio|submarine|2}}.
- Northrop Grumman B-21 Raider, a nuclear capable, long-range, stealth strategic bomber entering service in the 2020s.
= Similar weapons =
- Agni-VI (India, under development).
- DF-41 (China, 2017).
- RS-24 Yars (Russia, 2011).
==References==
{{Reflist}}
External links
- [https://crsreports.congress.gov/product/pdf/IF/IF11681/3 Defense Primer: GBSD Capabilities (Congressional Research Service)]
- [https://www.northropgrumman.com/space/sentinel/ GBSD Information from manufacturer]
{{US missiles}}
Category:Intercontinental ballistic missiles of the United States