Skip to main content (Press Enter).
Toggle navigation
National Defense University Press
The premier professional military and academic publishing house
NDU Press
Search
Search NDU Press:
Search
Search NDU Press:
Search
Home
About
Essay Competitions
Joint Force Quarterly
PRISM
Other Publications
Books
Case Studies
Occasional Papers
Policy Briefs
Strategic Monographs
Submit a Manuscript
Contact
News
| Feb. 1, 2011
Conventional Prompt Global Strike: Strategic Asset or Unusable Liability?
By M. Elaine Bunn and Vincent A. Manzo
Strategic Forum 263
DOWNLOAD PDF
Conventional Prompt Global Strike: Strategic Asset or Unusable L
Strategic Forum 269
SHARE IMAGE:
Download Image
Image Details
Photo By: M. Elaine Bunn and Vincent A. Ma
VIRIN: 180314-D-BD104-016
Key Points
A Conventional Prompt Global Strike (CPGS) capability would be a valuable strategic asset for some fleeting, denied, and difficult-to-reach targets. It would fill a gap in U.S. conventional strike capability in some plausible high-risk scenarios, contribute to a more versatile and credible U.S. strategic posture, and potentially enhance deterrence across a diverse spectrum of threats.
A small number of CPGS systems would not significantly affect the size of the U.S. deployed nuclear arsenal or substitute for the ability of nuclear weapons to hold large sets of hard, deeply buried, or mobile targets at risk.
A key concern is the risk that either Russia or China might launch its nuclear forces due to uncertainty about the target of an ambiguous U.S. CPGS strike. Assuming functioning early warning systems, the Conventional Trident Modification (CTM) mitigates this risk better than the conventional strike missile because Russian and Chinese officials would be better able to assess quickly whether a CTM would land on their territory.
Read More →
SHARE
PRINT