|
Page 4 of 6 The myth of independence
We are currently bound into a nuclear framework with the US by a unique bilateral agreement,
the 1958 Mutual Defence Agreement (MDA)*. Under this agreement collaboration covers
all aspects of nuclear weapons design, development and maintenance. All features of the UK
system — the platform, delivery system and warheads of Trident depend on US support. The
Trident II D5 missiles are leased from a US missile pool and are manufactured, tested and
serviced in the US; Trident warheads are based on a US design and several of their crucial
components — without which they would not work — are manufactured in the US and
purchased off-the-shelf by the UK. Our system is also reliant on US software for all aspects of
targeting. 26
Considering how the UK’s foreign policies have so mirrored those of the US and how closely
our government seems to join in with US military initiatives including the Iraq war, one would also
question how politically dependent our nuclear weapons system is on the US’s approval of its use.
It is unlikely that we would use it without US agreement. Trident submarines are assigned to
NATO and this relationship would probably continue in the event of a future system being
commissioned. Both NATO and the US have a first strike policy.
The ‘minimum' system of weapons of mass destruction
Our nuclear weapons system Trident consists of almost 200 nuclear warheads launched from
US Trident missiles, carried on four submarines; each warhead has about eight times the
explosive power of the Hiroshima bomb. Replacing Trident can only be described as rearmament.
Yet, a decision to replace it with a system that has fewer warheads or submarines,
means that the government tries to claim that moves to disarm have been made. It is
repeatedly asserted that replacing the previous nuclear weapons system Polaris/Chevaline
with Trident was a substantial reduction in the UK’s nuclear armaments, that Trident is a
‘minimum deterrent’ and under the NPT the UK ‘has an extremely good record of meeting our
obligations’. 27
Apart from the terrible potential for destruction that even one nuclear weapon has (see
Box 3), these claims are completely misleading as, to date, Trident is the most capable
and advanced nuclear weapons system ever to be deployed by the UK.28 Its missiles are
faster, have almost double the range, are more accurate and can hit more targets than the
previous system. According to Dr Rebecca Johnson from think-tank Acronym, claims that
the system has been detargeted and is on several days notice to fire are empty when this
procedure can be very quickly reversed.29
In 1994 the Defence Select Committee noted, ‘Trident’s accuracy and sophistication in other
respects does — and was always intended to — represent a significant enhancement of the
UK’s nuclear capability. We have invested a great deal of money to make it possible to attack
more targets with greater effectiveness using nominally equivalent explosive power’.30
The government is not choosing a new nuclear weapons system that is any less capable or
usable than the current system. The plan is to upgrade Trident missiles and order a new fleet
of purpose built submarines, most likely to be devloped by BAE Systems. The UK missiles
come from a US pool and the UK government is to take part in a planned programme by the
US Navy to upgrade the missiles with a life extension plan. Hans Kristensen, Director of the
Nuclear Information Project, believes this programme will ‘increase mission flexibility’.
A practical and realistic solution
It is not unrealistic for the UK to decide to free itself from nuclear weapons as required by
the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. Four countries — South Africa, Belarus, Kazakhstan
and Ukraine have already done so. The UK is only one of a handful of states that actually
possesses nuclear weapons. In contrast 180 non-nuclear weapon states have signed the NPT.
None of these countries possess nuclear weapons; their safety is not dependent on owning
them. Although there are 39 countries in the world, in addition to the five declared nuclear
weapon states, that have nuclear power or research reactors and the capability to produce
nuclear weapons, nearly all of them have chosen not to possess them. Many of these
countries have also signed treaties which cover large parts of the world including Southeast
Asia, the South Pacific, Latin America and Africa that are specifically nuclear weapon free
zones.
A decision by the UK not to replace Trident would not only greatly strengthen the viability of
the NPT but would enhance Britain’s standing with the vast majority of the countries in the
world that overwhelmingly demand that nuclear weapon states should fulfil their obligations
to disarm.
|
Campaigns 
