Lt. Gen. Anthony Cotton, Air Force Global Strike Command deputy commander, converses with Airmen from Dyess Air Force Base, Texas regarding a B-1B Lancer at Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana, July 16, 2021. (U.S. Air Force photo by Airman 1st Class Chase Sullivan)
WASHINGTON — The likely future commander of US Strategic Command isn’t ready to say he agrees with the Biden administration’s plan to terminate a controversial low-yield, sea-launched nuclear cruise missile. But he’s not ruling it out, either.
During his confirmation hearing today in front of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Gen. Anthony Cotton carefully threaded the needle when he was asked by several lawmakers whether the nation should push forward with plans announced in the fiscal 2023 budget to cancel the Sea Launched Cruise Missile-Nuclear, or SLCM-N.
“When it comes to SLCM-N, I must admit that I would like to be able to do like my predecessors before to make an assessment on that,” said Cotton, who as head of Air Force Global Strike Command oversees two legs of the nuclear triad — namely, the bomber forces and intercontinental ballistic missiles, but not sea-launched nukes.. “I am not familiar with that weapon system, on the specifics of what it can do or the capabilities [it has] to close the capability gap that we might perceive,” he said of SLCM.
Pentagon officials announced the cancellation of the SLCM-N program in March, saying that the decision was prompted by the findings of the Nuclear Posture Review. (A classified version of the NPR was provided to lawmakers then, while an unclassified version has not been released.)
“There was direction from the president to reduce the role of nuclear weapons in our defense strategy. That [decision to cancel SLCM-N] was a component,” said one Pentagon official who spoke to reporters on background ahead of the budget release.
Months later, several top military officers — including Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley, Vice Chairman Adm. Christopher Grady and Adm. Charles Richard, STRATCOM’s current commander — testified to lawmakers that they disagreed with the decision, breaking off from the White House and Pentagon civilian leadership.
“My general view is that this president or any president deserve to have multiple options to deal with national security situations,” Milley told lawmakers in April, just days after Richard penned a note claiming that a “deterrence and assurance gap exists” without SLCM-N.
Today Cotton acknowledged that — like Milley, Grady and Richard — he believes there is a capability gap posed by Russia’s development of low-yield nuclear weapons. What he doesn’t know is whether SLCM-N is the best option for contending with such threats, he said. “The only thing that’s different,” he said, “is I have yet to do an assessment on the weapon system itself.”
RELATED: The nuclear 3 body problem: STRATCOM ‘furiously’ rewriting deterrence theory
Cotton, who was tapped in June for the STRATCOM post, sailed through the hearing with no comments from SASC members indicating his nomination would be held up or blocked.
If confirmed, one of his major priorities would be to ensure the United States has a nuclear strategy capable of contending with both Russia and China, he said. Historically, US nuclear strategy has been aimed at a singular near-peer adversary, but both Russia and China have build nuclear triads and continue to make investments in nuclear modernization.
“We are going to have to understand more deeply the Chinese nuclear strategy,” Cotton said.
