deterrent

Op-Ed: David Cameron’s nuclear fantasy land

David Cameron insists we must replace the Trident nuclear weapon system because the future is uncertain. None of us has a crystal ball so we had better keep Trident just in case. He points to the dangerous escalation of tension by the Kim regime in North Korea and Iran’s suspected nuclear weapons programme as justification. All well and good, until you scratch beneath the surface and realise what a highly contingent argument this is for the economic, political, opportunity, and moral costs at stake (yes, moral, because the practice of ‘nuclear deterrence’ rests inescapably on the threat of use – the threat of indiscriminate and catastrophic nuclear violence).

A Progressive Nuclear Policy: Rethinking Continuous-at-sea deterrence

The United Kingdom has maintained unbroken nuclear weapons patrols since 1968. The rationale for this doctrine of continuous deterrence has been based on several pillars that are irrelevant in today’s environment. Rather than an absolute need for continuous deterrent, there is instead a great opportunity for Britain to take the lead as the most progressive of the nuclear weapons states by reducing the readiness and size of its
strategic force. Article originally published in RUSI Journal, Vol. 155, No. 2.

Please select the PDF icon below to read the full article. 

Time to reassess Trident options amid funding crisis: BASIC report

 

It is time to reassess options for the replacement of the Trident nuclear missile submarines in the light of indications that the capital cost of doing so could run to 28 billion pounds over the next 10-15 years, according to a new report by the British American Security Information Council (BASIC).

Image: 

About BASIC: 

No

Free terms: 

Newsletter: 

Region: 

Topic: 

A crisis in financing Britain’s replacement of Trident?

It is time to reassess options for the replacement of the Trident nuclear missile submarines in the light of indications that the capital cost, to be funded from the Defence Ministry's core budget, could run to 28 billion pounds over the next 10-15 years. But Paul Ingram and Nick Ritchie also argue that it would be a mistake to base a decision on cost alone.

Click the "Full article (PDF)" button below to read the report.

 

Related publication:

Subscribe to RSS - deterrent