the Subcommittee on Strategic Forces of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives, Assistant Secretary of Defense Robert Scher asserted that the long-range standoff weapon would provide the United States with the ability to respond proportionately to a limited nuclear attack . (10) In a 2013 article in the Telegraph, Philip Hammond, then-Defense Secretary of the United Kingdom explained, A cruise-based deterrent would carry significant risk of miscalculation and unintended escalation. . (11) In a 2015 article in the Washington Post, former Secretary of Defense William J. Perry and former Assistant Secretary of Defense Andrew Weber wrote, Because they can be launched without warning and come in both nuclear and conventional variants, cruise missiles are a uniquely destabilizing type of weapon. . 3. Restriction on use of funds for long-range standoff weapon (a) In general Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in any fiscal year, the Secretary of Defense may not obligate or expend more than $95,600,000 on development of the long-range standoff weapon or any other nuclear-capable air-launched cruise missile, and the Secretary of Energy may not obligate or expend more than $220,253,000 on the life extension program for the W80–4 warhead, until the Secretary of Defense, in consultation with the heads of other relevant Federal agencies, submits to the appropriate congressional committees a Nuclear Posture Review that includes a detailed and specific assessment of the following: (1) The anticipated capabilities of the long-range standoff weapon to hold targets at risk beyond other already existing and planned nuclear-capable delivery systems. (2) The anticipated ability of the long-range standoff weapon to elude adversary integrated air and missile defenses compared to the B–21 bomber. (3) The anticipated effect of the long-range standoff weapon on strategic stability relative to other nuclear-armed countries. (4) The anticipated effect of the long-range standoff weapon on the offensive