By Christopher Harress

02/25/16

…An August report from the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA), a non-partisan Washington, D.C., think tank, outlined areas in which the Pentagon could save money when upgrading the nuclear-weapons system. Some of the biggest savings that could be made between now and 2019 came in the form of cutting the number of ballistic missile nuclear submarines from 14 to 10, saving $8.1 billion, and eliminating the B61-12 nuclear bomb program to save $6.3 billion. Despite the potential for savings, Evan Montgomery, a senior fellow at the CSBA and author of August’s report, told IBT via email that Russian presence in the Baltic enclave of Kaliningrad, where it had placed medium-range ballistic missiles, was a concern that means it’s unlikely Congress will decide to cut costs. “The renewed threat from Russia is just one reason why additional reductions in U.S. nuclear weapons don’t make much sense right now, but it might be the biggest,” said Montgomery. “At a time when Moscow is modernizing its own nuclear forces, violating the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, and creating instability throughout its neighborhood, it’s hard to imagine that unilateral reductions wouldn’t provoke a backlash in Congress.”

Read Christopher Harress’ full story in International Business Times