„Nuklearna gąbka” – dylematy wokół lądowej gałęzi amerykańskiej strategicznej triady nuklearnej

Autor

  • Rafał Kopeć Uniwersytet Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Krakowie image/svg+xml

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.23.2026.101.04

Słowa kluczowe:

strategiczna triada nuklearna, broń nuklearna, proces decyzyjny, kalkulacje strategiczne, międzykontynentalne pociski balistyczne

Abstrakt

‘NUCLEAR SPONGE’ – DILEMMAS REGARDING THE LAND BRANCH OF THE US STRATEGIC NUCLEAR TRIAD
The future of the land branch of the strategic nuclear triad has become the subject of intense political and military debate in the United States. The text analyzes this debate, focusing on the arguments presented by both sides of the dispute – supporters and opponents of maintaining this element of the US strategic arsenal. The manner of resolving the dispute leads to the conclusion that strategic issues are subject to the oscillations of current policy to a relatively small extent, and that arguments of a military nature, including those based on the understanding of specialized issues related to military technology and operational doctrines, are decisive.

Pobrania

Statystyki pobrań niedostępne.

Biogram autora

  • Rafał Kopeć - Uniwersytet Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Krakowie

    doktor habilitowany w dyscyplinie nauki o bezpieczeństwie, pracownik Instytutu Bezpieczeństwa i Informatyki Uniwersytetu Komisji Edukacji Narodowej w Krakowie, gdzie pełni funkcję kierownika Katedry Myśli Strategicznej, koordynator sieci badawczej Deterrence and Assurance Academic Alliance przy Dowództwie Strategicznym Sił Zbrojnych Stanów Zjednoczonych (USSTRATCOM), uczestnik staży naukowych w USA, Ukrainie i na Słowacji, stały współpracownik czasopisma „Okręty Wojenne”. Autor książek, m.in.: Militaryzacja przestrzeni kosmicznej w ujęciu bezpieczeństwa międzynarodowego (2022), Militarne metody zapobiegania proliferacji broni masowego rażenia (2015), Strategie nuklearne w okresie pozimnowojennym (2014), współautor: Wojna dronów. Militarne wykorzystanie bezzałogowych statków powietrznych (2021), Odstraszanie militarne w XXI wieku. Polska – NATO – Rosja (2017).

Bibliografia

The 3 A.M. Phone Call: False Warnings of Soviet Missile Attack during 1979-1980 Led to Alert Actions for U.S. Strategic Forces, ed. W. Burr, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book, No. 371, [online] https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/nukevault/ebb371/.
View in Google Scholar

Affek J., Amerykańska strategiczna triada nuklearna, „Zeszyty Naukowe AON” 2015, nr 1(98).
View in Google Scholar

Amestoy A., Hooks J., Why Are There So Many Nuclear Missiles in Montana?, Montana Public Radio, 15 II 2023, [online] https://www.mtpr.org/montana-news/2023-02-15/whyare-there-so-many-nuclear-missiles-in-montana.
View in Google Scholar

Babu S., Kumar S., Underwater Communications, 2015 IEEE Underwater Technology (UT), Chennai 2015, https://doi.org/10.1109/UT.2015.7108234. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1109/UT.2015.7108234
View in Google Scholar

Boniface P., French Nuclear Weapons Policy After the Cold War, Washington 1998.
View in Google Scholar

Bradley J., China’s Nuclear Modernization and Expansion: Ways Beijing Could Adapt Its Nuclear Policy, Fairfax 2022.
View in Google Scholar

Buchonnet D., MIRV: A Brief History of Minuteman and Multiple Reentry Vehicles, Livermore 1976.
View in Google Scholar

Cimbala S., Lowther S., Nuclear Modernization and the Sentinel ICBM, „Aether: A Journal of Strategic Airpower & Spacepower” 2022, vol. 1, no. 2.
View in Google Scholar

Colina T.Z., Welcome to America’s ‘Nuclear Sponge’, Defense One, 2 II 2017, [online] https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2017/02/welcome-americas-nuclear-sponge/135135/.
View in Google Scholar

Contracts For Sept. 8, 2020, U.S. Department of Defense, [online] https://www.defense.gov/News/Contracts/Contract/Article/2340084/.
View in Google Scholar

Costlow M.R., Safety in Diversity: The Strategic Value of ICBMs and GBSD in the Nuclear Triad, Fairfax 2021.
View in Google Scholar

Cote Jr. O.R., Invisible Nuclear-Armed Submarines, or Transparent Oceans? Are Ballistic Missile Submarines Still the Best Deterrent for the United States?, „Bulletin of Nuclear Scientists” 2019, vol. 75, no. 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2019.1555998. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2019.1555998
View in Google Scholar

Crook M.R., Nuclear Deterrence and Arms Control: Agreements Between Three Peer Adversaries, Monterey 2022.
View in Google Scholar

Defense Premier: Strategic Nuclear Forces, Washington 2023.
View in Google Scholar

Drozdziński R., Wprowadzenie do badań nad dyskursem strategicznym. Rozważania wstępne, „Przegląd Rusycystyczny” 2020, t. 169, nr 1, https://doi.org/10.31261/pr.7729. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31261/pr.7729
View in Google Scholar

Environmental Impact Statement for the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent Deployment and Minuteman III Decommissioning and Disposal, Barksdale 2022.
View in Google Scholar

Frazier I., Great Plains, New York 1989.
View in Google Scholar

Friedman N., Strategic Submarines and Strategic Stability: Looking Towards the 2030s, Canberra 2019.
View in Google Scholar

Geller P.J., U.S. Nuclear Weapons, [w:] Index of U.S. Military Strength 2023, eds D.L. Wood i in., Washington 2023.
View in Google Scholar

Gomaa W., El-Sherif A.F., El-Sharkawy Y.H., Underwater Laser Detection Systems, „SPIE” 2015, vol. 9343, https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2080181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2080181
View in Google Scholar

Gordon Ch., B-2 Fleet Remains Grounded, Limiting Participation at Red Flag, Air and Space Forces Magazine, 5 II 2003, [online] https://www.airandspaceforces.com/b-2-fleet-remains-grounded-limiting-participation-at-red-flag/.
View in Google Scholar

Hadley G., Tirpak J.A., GBSD Finally Gets a Name: ‘Sentinel’, Air and Space Forces Magazine, 5 IV 2022, [online] https://www.airandspaceforces.com/gbsd-finally-gets-a-namesentinel/.
View in Google Scholar

Hartung W.D., Inside the ICBM Lobby: Special Interests or the National Interest?, Arms Control Association, V 2021, [online] https://www.armscontrol.org/act/2021-05/features/inside-icbm-lobby-special-interests-national-interest.
View in Google Scholar

Herken G., The Flying Crowbar, „Air and Space Smithsonian” 1990, vol. 5, no. 1.
View in Google Scholar

Hewitt K., Experts Discuss the Politics of New START and Strategic Nuclear Modernization, Brookings, 17 I 2019, [online] https://www.brookings.edu/articles/experts-discuss-thepolitics-of-new-start-and-strategic-nuclear-modernization/.
View in Google Scholar

Hollenhorst J., Giant Utah Missile Contracts Generates Lots of Jobs, Contract, KSL TV, 7 I 2021, [online] https://ksltv.com/463848/giant-utah-missile-contract-generates-lots-of-jobs-debate/.
View in Google Scholar

Kaplan F., The Missile Trap: Congress’s ICBM Caucus is Taking Aim at the White House, Slate, 10 III 2021, [online] https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2021/03/icbm-gbsd-missilelobby.html.
View in Google Scholar

Klotz F.G., Evans A.E., Modernizing the U.S. Nuclear Triad: The Rationale for a New Intercontinental Ballistic Missile, Santa Monica 2022.
View in Google Scholar

Kopeć R., Mazur P., Odstraszanie militarne w XXI wieku. Polska – NATO – Rosja, Kraków 2017.
View in Google Scholar

Korda M., Alternatives to Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, Washington 2021.
View in Google Scholar

Korda M., New Environmental Assessment Reveals Fascinating Alternatives to Land-Based ICBMs, Federation of American Scientists, 13 VII 2022, [online] https://fas.org/publication/new-environmental-assessment-reveals-fascinating-alternatives-to-land-based-icbms/.
View in Google Scholar

Korda M., Siloed Thinking: A Closer Look at the Ground-Based Strategic Deterrent, Washington 2021.
View in Google Scholar

Krepinevich Jr. A.F., The New Nuclear Age: How China’s Growing Nuclear Arsenal Threatens Deterrence, „Foreign Affairs” 2022, vol. 101, no. 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6439-2022-20-3-105-117
View in Google Scholar

Kristensen H.M., US Navy Instruction Confirms Retirement of Nuclear Tomahawk Cruise Missile, Federation of American Scientists, 18 III 2013, [online] https://fas.org/publication/tomahawk/.
View in Google Scholar

Kristensen H.M., Handler J., World Nuclear Forces, [w:] SIPRI Yearbook 2002: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security, Stockholm 2002.
View in Google Scholar

Kristensen H.M., Korda M., United States Nuclear Forces, 2023, „Bulletin of Atomic Scientists” 2023, vol. 79, no. 1, https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2022.2156686. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2022.2156686
View in Google Scholar

Kristensen H.M., Korda M., Reynolds E., Russian Nuclear Weapons, 2023, „Bulletin of Atomic Scientists” 2023, vol. 79, no. 3, https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2023.2202542. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.2023.2202542
View in Google Scholar

Kristensen H.M., McKinzie M., Postol R.A., How US Nuclear Force Modernization is Undermining Strategic Stability: The Burst-Height Compensating Super-Fuse, „Bulletin of Atomic Scientists” 2017, 1 III, [online] https://thebulletin.org/2017/03/how-us-nuclear-forcemodernization-is-undermining-strategic-stability-the-burst-height-compensating-super-fuze/.
View in Google Scholar

Kroenig M., The Case for the US ICBMs Force, „Strategic Studies Quarterly” 2018, Fall.
View in Google Scholar

Kroenig M., The Logic of American Nuclear Strategy: Why Strategic Superiority Matters, New York 2018. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190849184.001.0001
View in Google Scholar

Launch on Warning: The Development of U.S. Capabilities, 1959-1979, ed. W. Burr, National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book, No. 43, [online] https://nsarchive2.gwu.edu/NSAEBB/NSAEBB43/.
View in Google Scholar

Liddell Hart B.H., Strategia. Działania pośrednie, [tłum. E. Bagieński, przedm. J. Drzewiecki], Warszawa 1959.
View in Google Scholar

Lockwood D., Bidding Down, „Bulletin of Atomic Scientists” 1992, vol. 48, no. 3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00963402.1992.11460074
View in Google Scholar

MacDonald E., The End of MIRVs for U.S. ICBMs, Union of Concerned Scientists, 27 VI 2014, [online] https://blog.ucsusa.org/emacdonald/the-end-of-mirvs-for-u-s-icbms/.
View in Google Scholar

Maloney S.M., Strategic Nuclear Force Signaling During the Russia–Ukraine Crisis: A Preliminary Analysis, Kingston 2022.
View in Google Scholar

Mehta A., Majority of Voters Support ICBM Replacement Alternatives, New Pool Finds, Defense News, 5 II 2021, [online] https://www.defensenews.com/smr/nuclear-arsenal/2021/02/05/majority-of-voters-support-icbm-replacement-alternatives-new-poll-finds/.
View in Google Scholar

Neufeld J., The Development of Ballistic Missiles in the United States Air Force 1945-1960, Washington 1990.
View in Google Scholar

Neufeld M.J., „Space Superiority”: Wernher von Braun’s Campaign for a Nuclear-Armed Space Station, 1946-1956, „Space Policy” 2006, vol. 22, no. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spacepol.2005.11.011
View in Google Scholar

New START Treaty Aggregate Numbers of Strategic Offensive Arms, Washington 2020.
View in Google Scholar

Perry W.J., Cartwright J.E., Spending Less on Weapons Could Actually Make Us Safer, The Washington Post, 16 XI 2017, [online] https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/spending-less-on-nuclear-weapons-could-actually-make-us-safer/2017/11/16/396ef0c6-ca56-11e7-aa96-54417592cf72_story.html.
View in Google Scholar

Rose T., America’s Nuclear Sponge, American History Association, 12 XII 2022, [online] https://www.historians.org/perspectives-article/americas-nuclear-sponge-opposition-tomilitarization-in-nevada-december-2022/.
View in Google Scholar

Sasińska-Klas T., Analiza dyskursywna i jej zastosowanie w badaniach na gruncie nauk społecznych, [w:] Odmiany współczesnej nauki o polityce, t. 1, red. P. Borowiec, R. Kłosowicz, P. Ścigaj, Kraków 2014.
View in Google Scholar

Sauer F., Atomic Anxiety: Deterrence, Taboo and the Non-Use of U.S. Nuclear Weapons, Hampshire–New York 2015.
View in Google Scholar

Schlosser E., Command and Control: Nuclear Weapons, the Damascus Accident, and the Illusion of Safety, New York 2013.
View in Google Scholar

Shelton J., From Cowboys to the Cold War: A History of Malmstorm AFB, Distinctly Montana, 18 VII 2024, [online] https://www.distinctlymontana.com/cowboys-cold-war.
View in Google Scholar

Snyder G.H., Deterrence by Denial and Punishment, Princeton 1959.
View in Google Scholar

Spinardi G., From Polaris to Trident:The Development of US Fleet Ballistic Missile Technology, Cambridge 2008.
View in Google Scholar

Statement of The Secretary of Defense Dick Cheney Before The House Armed Services Committee in Connection with The FY 1993 Budget for The Department of Defense, 6 II 1992.
View in Google Scholar

Trevithick J., Firing ICBMs From Lakes, Tunnels Considered Before Air Force Picked New Missile, The Drive, 14 VII 2022, [online] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/air-force-considered-firing-icbms-from-lakes-tunnels-before-picking-new-missile.
View in Google Scholar

Trevithick J., USAF Replaces Bulky Tape Cartridges for Loading Launch Codes Into ICBMs, The Drive, 29 VI 2019, [online] https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14828/usaf-replaces-bulky-tape-cartridges-for-loading-launch-codes-into-icbms.
View in Google Scholar

Weedon A., China Has Tested a New Laser Designer to Find Submarines, ABC News, 4 X 2019, [online] https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-10-04/chinese-scientists-are-developing-lasersto-find-submarines/11570886.
View in Google Scholar

Wittner L.S., The Struggle against the Bomb, Vol. 3: Towards Nuclear Abolition: A History of the World Nuclear Disarmament Movement, 1971 to Present, Stanford 2003. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9781503624320
View in Google Scholar

Wright D., Hartung W.D., Gronlund L., Rethinking Land-Bases Nuclear Missiles: Sensible Risk-Reduction Practices for US ICBMs, Cambridge 2020.
View in Google Scholar

Pobrania

Opublikowane

28-03-2026

Numer

Tom 23 Nr 1(101) (2026)

Dział

Artykuły

Licencja

Creative Commons License

Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne – Bez utworów zależnych 4.0 Międzynarodowe.

Jak cytować

„«Nuklearna gąbka» – dylematy wokół lądowej gałęzi amerykańskiej strategicznej triady nuklearnej”. 2026. Politeja 23 (1(101): 81-104. https://doi.org/10.12797/Politeja.23.2026.101.04.