In the recent UN General Assembly Session, Secretary-General Kofi Annan expressed deep regret over the fate of non-proliferation agenda. The year 2005 could be seen as a 'watershed' for non-proliferation. First, the reluctance of the US to carry forward the NPT agenda; second, the compromise effected by the US with the non-proliferation regime while supporting India's civilian nuclear energy programme; and, third, the US adopting an offensive nuclear posture in its 'draft' document titled "Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations", which has been submitted for approval to the Department of Defence.

The Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy is expected to review this document for possible approval by the end of this year. This document differs largely from the earlier nuclear doctrines brought out in 1993 and 1995. The summary of changes included in this draft mention major differences from the 1995 doctrine, and claims that this new document revises the discussion on nuclear weapons use across a range of military operations. These new guidelines reflect a shift towards increasing the role of nuclear weapons in the Bush administration's war planning.

In the earlier (Clinton era) nuclear doctrine, there was no mention of the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons or specifically against threats from weapons of mass destruction (WMD). But, now, it has been recommended that the US Presidents' approval should be sought for use of nuclear weapons if an adversary uses or intends to use WMDs against the US forces or its allies and/or innocent civilian populations that conventional forces cannot stop. The document also recommends the pre-emptive use of nuclear weapons in the eventuality of an imminent attack by biological weapons that only nuclear weapons can safely destroy/annihilate. In spite of this report being in the draft phase, placing this report on the Internet has raised considerable discomfort. The public release of this document has fostered insecurity in some other countries and can encourage nuclear proliferation.

It is suggested that the US is planning to make use of nuclear weapons without much provocation. These nuclear plans are anomalous, particularly the United States is finding fault with Iran and North Korea. Moreover, it is argued that the US may not have the intelligence to launch pre-emptive nuclear strikes, witness the quality of their intelligence regarding the presence of WMDs in Iraq!

The controversy raised by its proposed policy has forced the Pentagon to remove this 'draft doctrine' from the Internet; however, its intentions of pursuing an offensive nuclear posture remain intact. This is not the first time that the US administration is thinking of a pro-active nuclear policy. There are reports that the Bush Administration has quietly put into place contingency plans for the use of nuclear weapons in pre-emptive attacks on at least two countries - Iran and North Korea. In addition, the US has decided to remain prepared to target the WMD sites of countries like Syria, Russia and China.

In fact, it is reported that the Defense Secretary, Donald H. Rumsfeld, has already approved a top secret 'Interim Global Strike Alert Order' directing the military to assume and maintain readiness to attack hostile countries that are developing weapons of mass destruction, specifically Iran and North Korea (CONPLAN 8022). This global strike concept includes a nuclear option. Interestingly, the current US 'face' in the United Nations, John Bolton, is said to be instrumental in the drive to end the quarter-century old US policy of no first nuclear strike against any non-nuclear power.

Unfortunately, for the Bush administration, the Congress has never given a go ahead on issues related to military nuclear matters. Last year, they halted funding for a study to determine the viability of the Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator warhead (RNEP), also known as the bunker buster, which the US administration envisage as being the best weapon to attack hardened, deeply buried weapons sites. Congress has refused to support the research towards development of nuclear weapons that could destroy biological or chemical weapons materials without dispersing them into the atmosphere. The reluctance shown by the Congress on nuclear issues suggests that this new doctrine may have to face stiff resistance from within. However, it is clear from that the US nuclear policy has changed over the last decade and is likely to weaken the non-proliferation regime.