Scrap Nuclear Arsenal, General Says : Military: Air Force officer’s comments run counter to the Clinton Administration view that the stockpile can be reduced, but not eliminated.

The United States should eliminate all its nuclear weapons, a top Air Force general said Friday in a sharp break from Pentagon orthodoxy.

Gen. Charles A. Horner, head of the U.S. Space Command, said the nation would secure “the high moral ground” worldwide while losing little militarily by eliminating its nuclear arsenal.

“The nuclear weapon is obsolete,” Horner said at a breakfast meeting with defense reporters. “I want to get rid of them all.”

Horner made clear he was “talking long-term” and said nuclear disarmament should only take place if other nuclear powers, especially Russia, go along.

Still, the comments from one of the military’s most senior officers run counter to the Clinton Administration view that the nuclear weapons arsenal can be reduced, but not eliminated entirely.

Horner, as head of one of the military’s nine “unified commands,” reports directly to the secretary of defense. His command covers military satellite operations and ballistic missile defense efforts, among other things.

In addition to heading the U.S. Space Command, Horner also leads the North American Aerospace Defense Command, which is responsible for defending the United States and Canada from a nuclear attack.

Horner first raised the idea of eliminating the nuclear arsenal last year, but only as something the Pentagon should consider in “what if” studies. His comments Friday marked a rare instance of an active-duty officer criticizing one of the fundamental pillars of U.S. defense throughout the Cold War.

“I want to go to zero and I’ll tell you why: if we and the Russians can go to zero nuclear weapons, then think what that does for us in our efforts to counter the new war,” Horner said.

The new military threat, unlike the superpower tensions of the past, comes from smaller, less stable countries that obtain weapons of mass destruction, Horner said.

“Think of the high moral ground we secure by having none,” said Horner, who plans to retire soon. “It’s kind of hard for us to say to North Korea, ‘You are terrible people, you’re developing a nuclear weapon,’ ” when the United States has thousands of them.

The Clinton Administration, in a review of its nuclear posture, is not endorsing total nuclear disarmament. But with the annual cost of maintaining the U.S. nuclear arsenal estimated at about $20 billion, Administration officials are looking at ways to reduce the stockpile sharply.

Current arms reduction treaties would bring the U.S. and Russian nuclear arsenals down to about 3,500 weapons apiece from an estimated 45,000 now on hand.

Horner is far from a pacifist. He led coalition air forces during the Persian Gulf War and he worries that the nation’s conventional forces are being cut too deeply. His concern over nuclear weapons is a practical one.

“I just don’t think nuclear weapons are usable,” Horner said. “I’m not saying that we militarily disarm; I’m saying that I have a nuclear weapon, and you’re North Korea and you have a nuclear weapon. You can use yours. I can’t use mine. What am I going to use it on? What are nuclear weapons good for? Busting cities. What President of the United States is going to take out Pyongyang?”