The US Department of Defense is pushing forward with development of the Sentinel intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), despite a staggering 81% increase in costs as Washington seeks to update its ‘nuclear triad. The Sentinel ICBM program, which aims to replace the ageing Minuteman III nuclear missiles, is now expected to cost $140.9bn – almost double the initial estimate of $77.7bn, according to a statement released by the Pentagon on Monday.
The dramatic increase in costs associated with the Sentinel ICBM programme has resulted in what is known as a Nunn-McCurdy breach – which occurs when the cost of developing a new programme increases by 25%, and necessitates a Department of Defense review to justify its continuation. Following this review, it was determined that there were no viable alternatives to the Sentinel ICBM.
William LaPlante, Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, stated in the Pentagon’s statement that his office is fully aware of the costs involved with the programme. However, he also emphasised that “we are also aware of the risks of not modernising our nuclear forces and not addressing the very real threats we confront.
A significant portion of the cost increase has been attributed to the construction of the new missile itself, as well as the large-scale modernisation of ground-based facilities such as launch control centres, nuclear missile bases, and testing facilities.
The decision to approve the development of the Sentinel ICBM has attracted considerable criticism from many quarters, with more than 700 US scientists representing various institutions across the country sending a letter to President Joe Biden and Congress on Monday, urging the Pentagon to abandon the “expensive, dangerous, and unnecessary” nuclear warhead programme.
The scientists argued that “there is no sound technical or strategic rationale for spending tens of billions of dollars building new nuclear weapons. Tara Drozdenko, Director of the Global Security Program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, stated that “these weapons – stored in silos across the Plains states – place a target on communities and increase the risk of nuclear war while offering no meaningful security benefits.
The size of the US nuclear arsenal is currently limited by New START – a treaty negotiated with Russia in 2010, which is set to expire in 2026 and for which there have been no indications of renewal. Last year, Russia formally suspended its participation in New START, citing US sanctions over the Ukraine conflict and encouragement of Kiev’s attacks on Russian strategic air bases. However, Moscow has continued to observe the treaty’s provisions, capping its number of nuclear weapons and delivery systems.