Abolish British Trident nuclear weapons

This video from England is called April 1, 2013: CND demo against Trident renewal outside Aldermaston AWE perimeter fence.

By Alan Mackinnon in Scotland:

Prospects for nuclear disarmament in Britain

Monday 20th january 2014

ALAN MACKINNON argues that the campaign to reject Trident needs to keep up the pressure both north and south of the border in 2014

LAST month a report from the House of Commons defence select committee highlighted the stark choices facing British defence and foreign policy.

The report noted the growing lack of public support for the expeditionary role of Britain’s armed forces in the form of “general public opposition to the war in Iraq, and questionable support among the electorate for current operations in Afghanistan.”

It was a recognition that the lessons of the disastrous wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya and, more particularly, the perceived failures of British military operations in Basra and Helmand provinces, had been learned.

It was that power of public opinion, built and consolidated over years of anti-war campaigning, that ultimately stopped military intervention in Syria and triggered a U-turn in US policy in the region.

In a reference to the declining size and capability of Britain’s armed forces, the same report introduces the concept of loss of “fighting power” and laments the “strategic shrinkage” which this represents.

Former US defence secretary Robert Gates, who served in the George W Bush and Obama administrations, also regretted the loss of Britain’s “full-spectrum” capability and argued that it would be a less effective ally in future US-led conflicts.

According to Max Hastings in the Telegraph last year, the British army, currently being downsized to 82,000, will soon “be capable of deploying only a single battlegroup of 7,000-8,000 men for sustained operations overseas.”

In a look ahead to the next Defence and Strategic Review, the defence committee report notes the US strategic “pivot” to Asia — the shift of 60 per cent of US global military forces to the Asia-Pacific region as part of a policy of encirclement and containment of China.

The report anticipates that Europe will be expected to “take on greater responsibility for its own security” without specifying what or who threatens that security.

All of this means choices. Britain can no longer maintain “full-spectrum” armed forces capable of operating anywhere in the world in support of the United States.

There is little public support for such a role and we can no longer afford it.

According to Professor Malcolm Chalmers of the Royal United Services Institute, by the end of this decade spending on Trident will swallow around 35 per cent of defence equipment spending for a period of 10 years or more, squeezing out other big-ticket items like new aircraft, new warships and protective equipment for soldiers.

Small wonder, then, that a defence traditionalist like James Arbuthnot, former Tory defence minister and chair of the House of Commons defence committee, has added his voice to the growing number of senior political figures and armed forces personnel who are sceptical about the “value” and affordability of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme.

In a recent interview with the Guardian newspaper he said that he was no longer convinced it was appropriate to replace Trident. In a comment meant to scuttle one of the key pro-Trident arguments, he argued: “It’s not an insurance policy, it’s a potential booby trap.”

But the choice is not just between nuclear and conventional weapons.

It is between weapons which project power and fear across the world — like nuclear weapons and aircraft carriers — and can fight wars thousands of miles away, and much simpler and cheaper ones which can defend Britain’s land and territorial waters.

It is, in other words, a choice between offence and defence.

And there is no weapon more offensive than Trident. Twenty-fourteen will be a crucial year for the anti-Trident campaign.

It is the year of Scotland’s referendum on independence.

A Yes vote would provide new opportunities to scrap the system, but no guarantee that a Scottish government would withstand the overwhelming pressure to reach some kind of leasing deal for the short to medium term.

The SNP determination to join Nato would be a complicating factor. Nor does a Yes vote look likely as opinion polls stand.

All the more reason, then, to keep all options open and to keep the focus on the Westminster government where the ultimate decision on Trident will be made.

The following year will see a UK-wide general election and the year after that, 2016, is when the “main gate” decision on Trident will be made.

Changing Labour Party policy in an election year will be very difficult, so it will be in 2014 that the groundwork must be done.

And there is growing support for that within the ranks of Labour and signs that Labour’s leaders may be beginning to lose their 30-year-old fear of being seen as soft on defence.

A Labour campaign which proposed scrapping Trident and spending the money on jobs, services and renewable energy could be a big vote winner. In Scotland, and across Britain, there is much to play for.

Alan Mackinnon is secretary of Scottish CND.

THE message “Peace not Trident” was delivered on the streets of Rochdale in Lancashire on Saturday: here.

Lib Dem plans for cutting the costs of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme have found favour among the military top brass: here.

A RETIRED naval officer has revealed a near-catastrophe on a nuclear submarine which threatened the lives of its crew three years ago: here.

When confronted with the illogicality of keeping nuclear weapons, the Establishment simply denies reality, says DAVID LOWRY: here.


39 thoughts on “Abolish British Trident nuclear weapons

  1. Pingback: British government recruits child soldiers | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  2. Pingback: Nuclear warheads in Scottish city streets | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  3. Pingback: Stop British government’s World War I warmongering | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  4. Pingback: Tony Blair’s Iraq war accomplice Jack Straw | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  5. Pingback: United States military cutbacks | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  6. Pingback: British nuclear weapons radiation scandal | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  7. Pingback: British nuclear weapons radiation leak scandal | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  8. Pingback: NATO expansion, anti-Semitism, Ukraine and Russia | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  9. Pingback: British young people against nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  10. Pingback: Namibian workers’ cancer from United States nuclear weapons program | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  11. Pingback: Marshall Islands sues nuclear weapons countries | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  12. Pingback: Get nuclear weapons out of Scotland | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  13. Pingback: Unilever abuses peace sign to sell deodorant | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  14. Pingback: British peace activists stop nuclear weapons construction | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  15. Pingback: ‘Independent Scotland will get nuclear weapons out’ | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  16. Pingback: 10,000 police to stop Welsh peace activists from protesting NATO | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  17. Pingback: Tony Blair still harms British Labour Party | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  18. Pingback: World War I dead, Hiroshima dead and British nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  19. Pingback: British peace scarf, seven miles against nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  20. Pingback: Seven-mile pro-peace scarf rolled out in England | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  21. Pingback: Peace academy in Wales, against glorifying World War I | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  22. Pingback: Greenbelt Christian festival in Britain | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  23. Pingback: Welsh peace movement against NATO | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  24. Pingback: £100 billion British nuclear weapons, stop it | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  25. Pingback: Scotland against Trident nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  26. Pingback: Stop British Trident nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  27. Pingback: British government spends on nuclear weapons, not on child poverty | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  28. Pingback: British workers demonstrate against government austerity | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  29. Pingback: Scrap Trident nuclear weapons, Welsh, Scottish parties say | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  30. Pingback: British soldiers leave Afghanistan | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  31. Pingback: British government spends billions on nuclear weapons, by-passing parliament | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  32. Pingback: Trident nuclear weapons in British parliament | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  33. Pingback: Britons demonstrate against Trident nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  34. Pingback: No to nuclear weapons in Scotland, or in Wales | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  35. Pingback: British Labour party will vote on nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  36. Pingback: Paris murders show uselessness of nuclear weapons | Dear Kitty. Some blog

  37. Pingback: Mass anti-nuclear weapons demonstration in London | Dear Kitty. Some blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.