WASHINGTON - The Bush administration is renewing a push to research and develop a new family of lower-yield nuclear weapons, including the controversial "bunker buster," or Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator, that could be used against the underground weapons labs and leadership redoubts of the nation's enemies.
Taking a new approach, the administration is insisting that the nation's existing nuclear weapons stockpile has flaws and is ill-suited to meet current and future threats. Officials are seeking to build several prototypes for new nuclear warheads within the next seven to 10 years.
But opponents, including some Republicans, argue that these weapons' smaller radioactive yield would make them more likely to be used and that their very existence could provoke a new nuclear arms race at a time when the United States is trying to curb nuclear proliferation.
Last year, opponents in the House blocked funding for new nuclear weapons research, though the research had been funded in previous sessions.
Trying again with a different set of arguments, the administration is asserting that the U.S. nuclear stockpile is perishable, not appropriate for military needs and difficult to protect against terrorists.
Plans call for spending $22.5 million on developing the bunker buster through the next two fiscal years, as well as spending $97 million on lower-yield warhead replacements over the next five years.
Opponents vow to fight this new initiative, with Rep. Edward J. Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat, announcing Friday that he had gathered 88 co-sponsors - including one Republican, Rep. Chris Shays of Connecticut - for a measure to strip bunker buster funding from the administration's budget.
Appearing last week before the Senate Armed Services Committee, Linton Brooks, chief of the National Nuclear Security Administration, said the existing stockpile was designed principally for the Cold War-era of high-yield, multi-warhead missiles and is wrong for current threats.
He told senators that there were a number of compelling reasons for bunker buster research and replacements for the stockpile. "The stockpile we inherited from the Cold War may not be the right stockpile militarily," Brooks said. "We have no capability against hard and deeply buried targets. Our systems are unsuited for some specialized missions."
