'Time for a Blunt Hammer'

Biden thinks there are non-nuclear ways to deter Putin. His military doesn't

- WILLIAM M. ARKIN

THE UNITED STATES WOULD "RESPOND FORCEFULLY" to any Russian nuclear strike, President Biden said but there's a divide between his administration and some of his military advisers over the role of American nuclear weapons and the most effective way to deter Vladimir Putin, knowledgeable sources tell Newsweek.

"It's the closest we've been to the use of nuclear weapons in over 50 years," says one civilian working at the Omaha, Nebraska-based Strategic Command.

"But I'm not so sure that we are communicating the right thing to deter Putin." The nuclear planner and two other senior officers who spoke to Newsweek say that President Biden favors non-nuclear options over nuclear ones, should Russia cross the nuclear threshold. The officers don't disagree, and none of them advocate any use of nuclear weapons in a preemptive strike. But to deter Putin from using nuclear weapons in the first place, the officers say, the United States needs to talk the nuclear talk and not be held back by the fear of having to walk the walk.

"We're in uncharted territory," says a senior intelligence officer. "Threatening to respond forcefully and creating catastrophic consequences for Russia [without] suggesting nuclear war: Is that strong enough to deter Putin? And is it really clear? I'm not so sure."

Because Biden and his top national security advisers can't conceive of pressing the nuclear button short of a full-scale attack on the United States, the White House is focusing too much-in its planning and its messaging on what it considers to be "usable" capabilities, the military officers say. The non-nuclear options include military and non-military measures, including the total economic isolation of Russia.

"We have to ponder whether other [non-nuclear] threats are powerful enough to deter Putin," says a former bomber pilot who is now a Washington-based Pentagon officer.