The chairman of the Committee of Armed Services of the House of Representatives, Democrat Adam Smith, charged against the Republicans who accuse him of blocking due to partisan interests the Pentagon budget when opposing to the development of low-yielding nuclear weapons.
“I can assure you that the non-partisan tradition of the Armed Services Committee has been respected by me, by party members and by our staff,” Smith said in a statement.
The House of Representatives has been debating the so-called National Defense Agreement (NDAA) for weeks, which will establish the funds that the Pentagon will have at its disposal in the next fiscal year which could be around 750,000 million dollars, which would mean an increase of 4.2% over last year’s budget.
Generally, the budget of the defense portfolio is usually approved with relative ease, however, this time both banks have been cast in the endowment of funds for the development of low-yield nuclear weapons, a program advocated by the Republicans but opposed to by the Democrats, who control the House.
President Donald Trump’s administration, who announced his intention to abandon in August the treaty of elimination of nuclear missiles of medium and short range (INF) signed in 1987 with Russia, advocates the development of this type of armament considering that it does not violate the no nuclear proliferation agreement.
In addition, the White House has argued that this type of material is necessary, since the Kremlin has equipped its Army with precisely these weapons.
Since the Pentagon has also defended on several occasions that when facing a low-intensity nuclear attack the response can not be limited to a large-scale atomic offensive, an alternative that at the time was defined by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger (1973-1977) as “surrender or suicide.”
In this sense, aware that the international community is suspicious of a possible arms race, Smith himself said last June that the ability to dissuade an “adversary” from carrying out a nuclear attack “does not only depend on the size of the nuclear arsenal, but also the strength of the alliances”.
“An escalation of nuclear weapons will not stabilize the world order, but the current budget proposal will,” said the congressman.