{"id":33272,"date":"2018-02-08T19:29:54","date_gmt":"2018-02-08T19:29:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/uncategorized\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/"},"modified":"2026-08-20T14:07:00","modified_gmt":"2026-08-20T14:07:00","slug":"the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/","title":{"rendered":"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The main novelty of the recent U.S. Nuclear Posture Review is the emphasis on small nuclear weapons. That is exactly the opposite of President Donald Trump\u2019s trademark: <a href=\"https:\/\/www.defensenews.com\/opinion\/commentary\/2018\/02\/05\/nuclear-posture-review-recognizing-the-return-to-great-power-competition\/\" title=\"\" class=\"\" style=\"\" target=\"_blank\">always being and having the biggest<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The White House has not written the Nuclear Posture Review. As usual, the Nuclear Posture Review is an interagency document that has passed many bureaucratic levels in both the departments of Defense and Energy (and to a lesser extent the State Department). Of all presidents since Bill Clinton, only Barack Obama succeeded in blocking proposals coming out of his administration and shaping nuclear declaratory policy to a limited extent \u2015 thanks to his personal interest and courage.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The president has a unique role when it comes to the moment that deterrence has failed and these weapons are supposed to be used. However, in preparing the list of (target) options, the presidential influence is marginal or nonexistent, as Janne Nolan and more recently Daniel Ellsberg have described.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">U.S. nuclear weapons policy \u2015 and that applies also to other nuclear possessor states \u2015 is made by lower-level defense officials (both civilians and the military) and nuclear scientists, called the \u201cnuclear priesthood.\u201d Of course, these nuclear priests believe to a large extent in what they preach, namely nuclear deterrence.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">And it is not difficult to come up with countries that need to be deterred. <a href=\"https:\/\/www.defensenews.com\/space\/2018\/02\/02\/nuclear-posture-review-puts-russia-firmly-in-crosshairs\/\" title=\"\" class=\"\" target=\"_blank\">This time it is Russia<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/www.defensenews.com\/smr\/munich-security-forum\/2018\/02\/08\/could-global-nationalism-drive-some-countries-into-the-arm-of-china\/\" title=\"\" class=\"\" target=\"_blank\">China<\/a>, North Korea and Iran.<\/p>\n\n\n\t<aside class=\"smg-interstitial-link wp-block-smg-interstitial-link\">\n\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/digital-show-dailies\/singapore-airshow\/2018\/02\/05\/will-concerns-about-north-koreas-nuclear-program-drive-deals-at-singapore-airshow\/\" class=\"smg-interstitial-link__inner\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"smg-interstitial-link__media\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"300\" height=\"240\" src=\"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/2414055.jpg.jpg?w=300\" class=\"smg-interstitial-link__image wp-post-image\" alt=\"\" \/>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"smg-interstitial-link__content\">\n\t\t\t\t<span class=\"smg-interstitial-link__kicker\">Related<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"smg-interstitial-link__title\">Will concerns about North Korea\u2019s nukes drive deals at Singapore Airshow?<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<p class=\"smg-interstitial-link__excerpt\">North Korea\u2019s nuclear threats is hovering like a specter over the Singapore Airshow, which will kick off Feb. 6. What remains to be seen is whether that fear will  entice more deals for military equipment.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/a>\n\t<\/aside>\n\t\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">But much more important than deterrence ideology (or theology, as it is basically a belief) \u2015 and this is mostly not mentioned \u2015 are the parochial interests involved: a gigantic bureaucratic complex left over from the Cold War that includes thousands of nuclear scientists in the Los Alamos National Lab, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and Sandia National Laboratories that on a permanent basis try to stay busy in developing, maintaining and building nuclear weapons.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Weapons = <a href=\"https:\/\/www.defensenews.com\/pentagon\/2018\/02\/08\/gao-says-nuclear-warhead-office-still-cant-afford-planned-modernization\/\" title=\"\" class=\"\" style=\"\" target=\"_blank\">money<\/a> = jobs. And of course prestige.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Developing and building new weapon systems \u2015 like this time an air-launched cruise missile and a sea-launched cruise missile \u2015 yields more money than maintaining existing weapon systems.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The same applies for the Pentagon: U.S. Strategic Command is eager to plug in the new nuclear weapons developed by the Department of Energy into \u201cnew\u201d military missions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">However, most happy are the defense firms that may build the toys. General Dynamics, for instance is estimated to receive $130-270 billion for the construction of the new Columbia-class nuclear submarines. That is a lot of money that will make many people, including politicians, smile.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Knowing this complex very well, former USSTRATCOM chief Gen. Lee Butler, who was in charge of the entire U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal at the end of the 1980s and the beginning of the 1990s, characterized it as follows: \u201cgargantuan agencies with mammoth appetites and a sense of infallibility that consume infinite resources in pursuit of a messianic vision of a demonization.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">If you want an explanation for both the irrational buildup of the U.S. nuclear weapons arsenal during the Cold War and the relative standstill \u2015 or inertia, as I once called it \u2015 in the build-down of the U.S. nuclear arsenal after the Cold War, especially since the mid-1990s, this is it.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">As the ghostwriters of the current and previous Nuclear Posture Reviews \u2015 Keith Payne, Brad Roberts, Frank Miller and John Harvey \u2015 stated: \u201cThe 2018 NPR reflects much more continuity than change.\u2019 Of course, more of the same is exactly what the nuclear priesthood wants.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The huge modernization plans had indeed already been announced by the Obama administration as a compromise for the (limited) reductions under the <a href=\"https:\/\/www.defensenews.com\/flashpoints\/2018\/02\/06\/russia-questions-us-compliance-with-key-nuke-accord\/\" title=\"\" class=\"\" target=\"_blank\">nuclear arms reduction treaty<\/a> New START. Even Obama\u2019s declaratory policy is basically maintained, except that the Trump administration also wants to deter enemies to attack critical infrastructure and cyberattacks. The Trump administration\u2019s Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The so-called main novelty is the introduction of low-yield nuclear weapons. Smaller nuclear weapons, however, are not novel at all. There are already 1,000 nuclear weapons in the U.S. arsenal that can be categorized as low-yield, and these kinds of weapons have always existed.<\/p>\n\n\n\t<aside class=\"smg-interstitial-link wp-block-smg-interstitial-link\">\n\t\t<a href=\"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/06\/mattis-no-such-thing-as-a-tactical-nuclear-weapon-but-new-cruise-missile-needed\/\" class=\"smg-interstitial-link__inner\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"smg-interstitial-link__media\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"300\" height=\"199\" src=\"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/ALCM_LRSO_Resize.jpg.jpg?w=300\" class=\"smg-interstitial-link__image wp-post-image\" alt=\"\" \/>\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"smg-interstitial-link__content\">\n\t\t\t\t<span class=\"smg-interstitial-link__kicker\">Related<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"smg-interstitial-link__title\">Mattis: No such thing as a \u2018tactical\u2019 nuclear weapon, but new cruise missile needed<\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<p class=\"smg-interstitial-link__excerpt\">When is a nuclear weapon tactical, and when is it strategic? It&#039;s pretty cut and dry for Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/a>\n\t<\/aside>\n\t\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Also new is the announcement to start building submarine-launched cruise missiles again. The last ones were just eliminated by the Obama administration. It is symbolic for how the system works. Building. Eliminating. Building them again. Eliminating. Building them again in another format or color. It never ends.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Allies, however, should make up their mind: Do they want to be (mis)used for U.S. domestic bureaucratic reasons, as it is abundantly clear that if the U.S. did not have to defend its allies, the nuclear priesthood would need much less U.S. nuclear weapon systems?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In other words, is it in the economic and strategic interest of allies to satisfy parochial needs for the nuclear military-industrial complex in the United States? America first, as Trump likes it \u2014 or not?<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><i>Tom Sauer is an associate professor of international politics at Universiteit Antwerpen in Belgium. He is a former BCSIA fellow at Harvard University, and he is the author of \u201dNuclear Inertia: US Nuclear Weapons Policy After the Cold War,\u201d which focuses on the Clinton administration\u2019s Nuclear Posture Review.<\/i><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>The Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":7,"featured_media":72690,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_yoast_wpseo_meta-robots-noindex":"","_yoast_wpseo_meta-robots-nofollow":"","_yoast_wpseo_canonical":"","_acf":"","_yoast_wpseo_primary_category":125,"_jetpack_feature_clip_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","_smg_distribution_targets":[]},"categories":[66,160,11,36,125,17,19,30,48],"tags":[8592,8596],"coauthors":[4447],"class_list":["post-33272","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-commentary","category-daily-news-roundup","category-global","category-newsletters","category-nuclear-triad","category-opinion","category-pentagon","category-smr","category-the-americas","tag-china","tag-north-korea"],"acf":{"subheadline":"","legacy_arc_id":"JDWDALMC65D7JBND4EKPEOHNSI","arc_canonical_url":"\/opinion\/commentary\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/","remove_feature_photo":false,"is_sponsored":false,"subtype":"","redirect_url":"","disable_inline_ads":false,"native_logo_pretext":"Presented By:"},"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.0 (Yoast SEO v28.1) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature - Defense News<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"The Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"The Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Defense News\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-02-08T19:29:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-08-20T14:07:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Tom Sauer\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Tom Sauer\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\n\t    \"@context\": \"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\n\t    \"@graph\": [\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"Article\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#article\",\n\t            \"isPartOf\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"author\": {\n\t                \"name\": \"migration\",\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/cc76c831bb37a926738c8391fca7a3b1\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"headline\": \"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature\",\n\t            \"datePublished\": \"2018-02-08T19:29:54+00:00\",\n\t            \"dateModified\": \"2026-08-20T14:07:00+00:00\",\n\t            \"mainEntityOfPage\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"wordCount\": 891,\n\t            \"commentCount\": 0,\n\t            \"publisher\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#organization\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"image\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#primaryimage\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"thumbnailUrl\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg\",\n\t            \"keywords\": [\n\t                \"china\",\n\t                \"north korea\"\n\t            ],\n\t            \"articleSection\": [\n\t                \"Commentary\",\n\t                \"Daily News Roundup\",\n\t                \"Global\",\n\t                \"Newsletters\",\n\t                \"Nuclear Triad\",\n\t                \"Opinion\",\n\t                \"Pentagon\",\n\t                \"Special Multimedia Reports\",\n\t                \"The Americas\"\n\t            ],\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\",\n\t            \"potentialAction\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"CommentAction\",\n\t                    \"name\": \"Comment\",\n\t                    \"target\": [\n\t                        \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#respond\"\n\t                    ]\n\t                }\n\t            ]\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"WebPage\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/\",\n\t            \"name\": \"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature - Defense News\",\n\t            \"isPartOf\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#website\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"primaryImageOfPage\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#primaryimage\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"image\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#primaryimage\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"thumbnailUrl\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg\",\n\t            \"datePublished\": \"2018-02-08T19:29:54+00:00\",\n\t            \"dateModified\": \"2026-08-20T14:07:00+00:00\",\n\t            \"description\": \"The Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.\",\n\t            \"breadcrumb\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#breadcrumb\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\",\n\t            \"potentialAction\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ReadAction\",\n\t                    \"target\": [\n\t                        \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/\"\n\t                    ]\n\t                }\n\t            ]\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"ImageObject\",\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#primaryimage\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg\",\n\t            \"contentUrl\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/08\\\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg\"\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"BreadcrumbList\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/2018\\\/02\\\/08\\\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\\\/#breadcrumb\",\n\t            \"itemListElement\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 1,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Home\",\n\t                    \"item\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/\",\n\t                    \"ad_zone\": \"home\"\n\t                },\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 2,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Special Multimedia Reports\",\n\t                    \"item\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/\",\n\t                    \"ad_zone\": \"smr\"\n\t                },\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 3,\n\t                    \"name\": \"Nuclear Triad\",\n\t                    \"item\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/smr\\\/nuclear-triad\\\/\",\n\t                    \"ad_zone\": \"nuclear-triad\"\n\t                },\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"ListItem\",\n\t                    \"position\": 4,\n\t                    \"name\": \"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature\"\n\t                }\n\t            ]\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"WebSite\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#website\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/\",\n\t            \"name\": \"Defense News\",\n\t            \"description\": \"Covering the politics, business and technology of defense | Defense News\",\n\t            \"publisher\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#organization\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"potentialAction\": [\n\t                {\n\t                    \"@type\": \"SearchAction\",\n\t                    \"target\": {\n\t                        \"@type\": \"EntryPoint\",\n\t                        \"urlTemplate\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"\n\t                    },\n\t                    \"query-input\": {\n\t                        \"@type\": \"PropertyValueSpecification\",\n\t                        \"valueRequired\": true,\n\t                        \"valueName\": \"search_term_string\"\n\t                    }\n\t                }\n\t            ],\n\t            \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\"\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"Organization\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#organization\",\n\t            \"name\": \"Defense News\",\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/\",\n\t            \"logo\": {\n\t                \"@type\": \"ImageObject\",\n\t                \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\",\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\n\t                \"url\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/defensenews-logo-white.png\",\n\t                \"contentUrl\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/06\\\/defensenews-logo-white.png\",\n\t                \"caption\": \"Defense News\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"image\": {\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"\n\t            }\n\t        },\n\t        {\n\t            \"@type\": \"Person\",\n\t            \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/cc76c831bb37a926738c8391fca7a3b1\",\n\t            \"name\": \"migration\",\n\t            \"image\": {\n\t                \"@type\": \"ImageObject\",\n\t                \"inLanguage\": \"en-US\",\n\t                \"@id\": \"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9e8d47be443ce94ce7fc357677b5f9c70235bb1f59e7267a102a74af58c04f59?s=96&d=mm&r=gcf4cb6ee0ec29e49e7a963234e4340ec\",\n\t                \"url\": \"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9e8d47be443ce94ce7fc357677b5f9c70235bb1f59e7267a102a74af58c04f59?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\n\t                \"contentUrl\": \"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/9e8d47be443ce94ce7fc357677b5f9c70235bb1f59e7267a102a74af58c04f59?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\n\t                \"caption\": \"migration\"\n\t            },\n\t            \"url\": \"https:\\\/\\\/one.sightlinemg.com\\\/defensenews\\\/author\\\/migration\\\/\"\n\t        }\n\t    ]\n\t}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature - Defense News","description":"The Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.","robots":{"index":"noindex","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature","og_description":"The Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.","og_url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/","og_site_name":"Defense News","article_published_time":"2018-02-08T19:29:54+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-08-20T14:07:00+00:00","author":"Tom Sauer","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Tom Sauer","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/"},"author":{"name":"migration","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#\/schema\/person\/cc76c831bb37a926738c8391fca7a3b1"},"headline":"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature","datePublished":"2018-02-08T19:29:54+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-20T14:07:00+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/"},"wordCount":891,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg","keywords":["china","north korea"],"articleSection":["Commentary","Daily News Roundup","Global","Newsletters","Nuclear Triad","Opinion","Pentagon","Special Multimedia Reports","The Americas"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/","url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/","name":"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature - Defense News","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg","datePublished":"2018-02-08T19:29:54+00:00","dateModified":"2026-08-20T14:07:00+00:00","description":"The Nuclear Posture Review neither proposes to leave the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty nor halt the testing moratorium. It did not propose a quantitative expansion of the nuclear arsenal either. Very un-Trump.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/2018\/02\/08\/the-us-nuclear-posture-review-does-not-carry-trumps-signature\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/","ad_zone":"home"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Special Multimedia Reports","item":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/","ad_zone":"smr"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Nuclear Triad","item":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/smr\/nuclear-triad\/","ad_zone":"nuclear-triad"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"The US Nuclear Posture Review does not carry Trump\u2019s signature"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#website","url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/","name":"Defense News","description":"Covering the politics, business and technology of defense | Defense News","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#organization","name":"Defense News","url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/defensenews-logo-white.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/defensenews-logo-white.png","caption":"Defense News"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/#\/schema\/person\/cc76c831bb37a926738c8391fca7a3b1","name":"migration","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9e8d47be443ce94ce7fc357677b5f9c70235bb1f59e7267a102a74af58c04f59?s=96&d=mm&r=gcf4cb6ee0ec29e49e7a963234e4340ec","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9e8d47be443ce94ce7fc357677b5f9c70235bb1f59e7267a102a74af58c04f59?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/9e8d47be443ce94ce7fc357677b5f9c70235bb1f59e7267a102a74af58c04f59?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"migration"},"url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/author\/migration\/"}]}},"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"distributor_meta":false,"distributor_terms":false,"distributor_media":false,"distributor_original_site_name":"Defense News","distributor_original_site_url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews","push-errors":false,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/08\/GettyImages-1474748.jpg.jpg","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33272","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/7"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=33272"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33272\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":75537,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33272\/revisions\/75537"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/72690"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33272"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33272"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33272"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=33272"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}