# Nukes and PALS: who has them? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [June 7, 2017, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398 "2017-06-07T23:11:06Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [June 7, 2017, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/1 "2017-06-07T23:11:06Z")
Here is a current [list of states with nuclear weapons](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_states_with_nuclear_weapons): China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, USA, India, North Korea, Pakistan, Israel, Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Turkey. (“Who’s next?”) A [Permissive Action Link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link) is a security device preventing unauthorized arming or detonation of a nuclear weapon. The technical details of such systems are classified, but clearly all states benefit from knowing that they are in control of their own nuclear weapons and so are the other guys. According to the above article, PALs were completely installed on all American nuclear weapons by 1987. However, that still leaves a lot of nuclear weapons out there, and concerning them the aggregated information in the article is more sporadic: in the 1970s France and the Soviet Union developed their own systems (assisted by US “guidance”), in the 1990s China asked the USA for the technology but was denied, as was Pakistan in the 2000s, and it is stated that the UK and Pakistan are known not to use PAL technology. My question is simple: going through the list, which states are currently known (at least with a degree of probability) to use technological means to restrict would-be General Rippers from exceeding their authority? Furthermore, would there be any rational reason for a state _not_ to use them, or to use them but keep that fact a secret? ---
**Author:** ![Tranquilis](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tranquilis/32/3639_2.png) [@Tranquilis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tranquilis)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/2 "2017-06-08T01:13:29Z")
So far as my knowledge goes, EVERY Non-Proliferation treaty member whom actually _has_ nukes, uses PALs in some form or another. I would expect non-treaty powers to use some form of PALs as well, as they make too much sense to NOT use them. After all, no one wants General Ripper in their own back yard… ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/3 "2017-06-08T01:25:54Z")
Possibly North Korea is detonating their nukes as fast as they can make them so maybe they’re an exception. We don’t know for sure what Israel has but if they have bombs assembled and ready to use I’m sure they’ve got safety devices on them. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/4 "2017-06-08T03:01:12Z")
I don’t get the joke in that list. ---
**Author:** ![Velocity](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/velocity/32/18006_2.png) [@Velocity](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Velocity)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 3:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/5 "2017-06-08T03:30:46Z")
Great OP username/thread title combo. ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/6 "2017-06-08T03:34:10Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > I don’t get the joke in that list. [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/oRLON3ddZIw/hqdefault.jpg "Tom Lehrer - Who's Next - with intro") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oRLON3ddZIw) ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/7 "2017-06-08T03:38:44Z")
Belgium, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, and Turkey do not have nuclear weapons. They participate in NATO’s nuclear sharing program. This means that they train in the use of nuclear weapons and have weapon systems that could deliver nuclear weapons. But the actual nuclear weapons (and their PALs) are kept by American forces in peacetime. Only in the event of a war would they be released to the other countries. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [June 8, 2017, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/8 "2017-06-08T14:49:34Z")
Well that’s a relief. Man, Belgium with nukes. The mind reels. ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [June 9, 2017, 11:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/9 "2017-06-09T11:29:05Z")
> [@Tranquilis](#): > > So far as my knowledge goes, EVERY Non-Proliferation treaty member whom actually _has_ nukes, uses PALs in some form or another. I would expect non-treaty powers to use some form of PALs as well, as they make too much sense to NOT use them. You would think so, but let’s look at what is known. Even though the need for PALs was recognized early on, the reason that it took until 1987 for the USA to complete deployment is that the military resisted them, arguing a lack of flexibility and fears that a decapitation strike or malfunction in time of crisis would prevent the use of nuclear weapons. As for the UK, the BBC article (from 2007) quotes the Royal Navy as arguing > [@](#): > > “It would be invidious to suggest… that Senior Service officers may, in difficult circumstances, act in defiance of their clear orders”. > > Neither the Navy nor the RAF installed PAL protection on their nuclear weapons. > > The RAF kept their unsafeguarded bombs at airbases until they were withdrawn in 1998. Note that there is nothing to suggest that the Royal Navy ever changed its mind. In short, we really need to go through and consider each state on the list. I am willing to stipulate that the USA (naturally including its weapons based in other countries), Russia, and probably France are using PALs in the field. There is evidence that British Trident SLBMs are _not_ equipped with PALs. That leaves China, India, North Korea, Pakistan, and Israel. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/10 "2017-06-10T00:37:49Z")
Any PAL-equipped weapon can’t be used in a doomsday second- or third-strike retaliation after their home country government has been comprehensively destroyed. As such, PALs are for countries with very, very robust multiply-survivable command and control systems. And who think they’re bigger enough than, or far enough away from, their expected adversaries so complete destruction of their C3 is implausible. The very existence of the famous [Letters of last resort - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_of_last_resort) implies PALs aren’t used on those weapons. Similar thinking probably applies to several other of the smaller nuclear nations. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/11 "2017-06-10T00:52:18Z")
> [@Leo\_Bloom](#): > > Well that’s a relief. Man, Belgium with nukes. The mind reels. Nobody expects the Flemish Incineration. ---
**Author:** ![griffin1977](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/977dab/32.png) [@griffin1977](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/griffin1977)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/12 "2017-06-10T04:46:08Z")
> [@DPRK](#): > > Furthermore, would there be any rational reason for a state _not_ to use them, or to use them but keep that fact a secret? Ask the US air force. They set the PAL codes to all zeros: > **[Launch code for US nukes was 00000000 for 20 years](https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/12/launch-code-for-us-nukes-was-00000000-for-20-years/)** > > PALs were not the pals of Strategic Command generals. ---
**Author:** ![LSLGuy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lslguy/32/5813_2.png) [@LSLGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LSLGuy)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/13 "2017-06-10T22:00:31Z")
DPRK’s question was about states = national governments. USAF’s \*de facto \*mutiny on PALs is a different category of situation. The rational reason(s) not to use them is pretty obvious and clear. It’s certainly arguable whether the benefits and drawbacks net to positive or negative. Reasons not to use them are: 1. Definitely reduces or eliminates your “dead hand” final retaliation deterrent. 2. May, due to PAL device malfunction, increase your dud rate. Perhaps massively so. 3. Definitely increases the bureaucratic complexity. Unless all weapons are set to a single code known only to HQ, you’ve got to keep track of the PAL code on each individual weapon and ensure you know which individual launch vehicle (aircraft, silo, or sub) has which individual weapons which need which individual codes. That’s a lot of basic inventory control that has to be done perfectly or you’ve dudded the weapon. 4. Definitely increases the C3 complexity. With PALs, you’ve got to transmit them accurately. The likelihood of messages getting garbled in transmission or reception is more or less proportional to message length. Recognize that some messages flow directly from top-level HQ to the individual actors in the field. Others may be copied and retransmitted several times as they work their way through the layers of organizational command. 5. Definitely increases operator complexity. operators need to enter the code correctly. Under rather high stress conditions. Depending on the weapon, entering an invalid PAL may permanently dud the weapon. Are you sure that’s the right code? Are you sure you’re sure that’s the right code? The benefits are also simple 1. It becomes impossible for an unauthorized detonation except in the presence of a separate malfunction. Depending on the details of the system, that may or may not prevent launch of the un-PALled warhead towards the target. Which may be nearly as devastating an unauthorized act. Which risk does the state government want to minimize? Reasonable minds may differ. I agree I don’t see a specific advantage to keeping the use of PAL secret at the state level. There’s no first-order deterrent theoretic reason secrecy helps. “If you have it, say so” seems a harmless enough policy. The second-and third order effects are more ambiguous. IOW, a blanket policy of secrecy on everything even remotely nuclear avoids the chipping away that always happens when stuff is half-classified. Folks say a little more than they ought. And for the bad guys, the first step to gathering an enemy’s secret tidbit is recognizing the secret tidbit exists to be gathered. Telling the world you have PALs is telling them there are codes to be stolen, you eschew “dead hand” etc. Having a policy that absolutely everything everywhere all the time is never public info is the other approach. With the advantage of simplicity and consistency. Again it’s arguable where the net benefit lies. ---
**Author:** ![Leo\_Bloom](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leo_bloom/32/10377_2.png) [@Leo\_Bloom](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leo_Bloom)\ **Post date:** [June 10, 2017, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/14 "2017-06-10T23:57:31Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Nobody expects the Flemish Incineration. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Ranchoth](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranchoth/32/1066_2.png) [@Ranchoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranchoth)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 6:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/15 "2017-06-11T06:49:05Z")
The last British nuclear gravity bomb did have a built in safety feature…[a key.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WE.177#/media/File:WE.177_safety_keys.jpg) Well, also, strictly speaking, like many nuclear gravity bombs, the weapon normally couldn’t detonate at _all_, even with the key, unless properly deployed from an aircraft, activating a number of speed/acceleration/hydrostatic etc. sensors. ---
**Author:** ![smithsb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smithsb/32/12107_2.png) [@smithsb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smithsb)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 8:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/16 "2017-06-11T08:26:26Z")
> [@LSLGuy](#): > > Any PAL-equipped weapon can’t be used in a doomsday second- or third-strike retaliation after their home country government has been comprehensively destroyed. > > As such, PALs are for countries with very, very robust multiply-survivable command and control systems. And who think they’re bigger enough than, or far enough away from, their expected adversaries so complete destruction of their C3 is implausible. > > The very existence of the famous [Letters of last resort - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Letters_of_last_resort) implies PALs aren’t used on those weapons. > > Similar thinking probably applies to several other of the smaller nuclear nations. PAL codes/combinations are different from launch codes/authorizations. Unlocking or enabling a weapon is not an authorization to launch; it’s a security feature to discourage, disrupt and/or delay unauthorized access to a warhead/device. At least from my US Army direct experience with tactical nukes. [note: US Army no longer (1993) has tactical nukes] I’m old!! I’m not seeing where the Letters would preclude a PAL device on a weapon. ---
**Author:** ![DPRK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/4491bb/32.png) [@DPRK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DPRK)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 9:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/17 "2017-06-11T09:49:59Z")
> [@](#): > > I’m not seeing where the Letters would preclude a PAL device on a weapon. If the code for the PAL is kept in the safe with the Letter, it rather defeats the point of having a PAL installed in the first place. Unless you are suggesting the codes would be transmitted in advance? ---
**Author:** ![smithsb](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smithsb/32/12107_2.png) [@smithsb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/smithsb)\ **Post date:** [June 11, 2017, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/18 "2017-06-11T20:23:59Z")
I have no knowledge of British procedures. As you suggest, having a letter and PAL codes in the same place would not be prudent. Perhaps separate safes? Or no PALs? My reference was to ancient US Army procedures were unlocking a weapon and launch authorization were different steps. ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2017, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nukes-and-pals-who-has-them/788398/19 "2017-06-13T18:59:55Z")
> [@smithsb](#): > > I have no knowledge of British procedures. As you suggest, having a letter and PAL codes in the same place would not be prudent. Perhaps separate safes? Or no PALs? They are kept save, and [always near at hand](http://us.hellomagazine.com/images/stories/1/2016/05/18/000/177/378/gallery_3_5.jpg).