At StratDem we look out at the security horizon and continue our attempt to develop “New Definitions of National Security” with an emphasis on bringing together “Environment Security with National Security”. Today we look at two key executive presidential actions in this regard, and a poll of American voters on likelihood of nuclear weapons use by the next president
First up, a frightening moment in polling history:
- Washington, DC – September 23, 2016 – Voters believe that a Donald Trump presidency would bring unprecedented risks to the United States, according to a new SurveyMonkey poll of 1,051 registered voters conducted on behalf of the Lincoln Leadership Initiative, a group of former Republican elected officials and staffers.
Next up, the departing president and his security legacy on two profound fronts:
Climate Crisis … and Nuclear Weapons
Recognizing the Climate Threat as National Security Threat
On September 21, 2016, the Obama Administration made two significant announcements related to climate change and national security – one which highlights the latest intelligence on the nature of the risk, and the second which lays the foundation for managing that risk across agencies. This included:
- A report from the National Intelligence Council (NIC): “Implications for US National Security of Anticipated Climate Change”;
- A Presidential Memorandum (PM): Climate Change and National Security,establishing an organizational framework for managing climate change risks to national security, to be be run by the National Security Advisor and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP).
Acting on the Threat of Nuclear Weapons Use
We repeat our call to President Obama for an executive order to remove nuclear weapons from ‘hair-trigger alert’ before he leaves office and, again, to consider rescinding the US ‘first use’ nuclear policy.
Next generation nuclear weapons — modernized, more ‘usable’ and soon-to-be-deployed — are a critical threat to security, not a move to enhanced security.
Now is the time to step away from a nuclear ‘first-use’ doctrine.
Now is the time to set additional protections in place against a nuclear war with its risk of cataclysmic escalation.