NUCLEAR AND WMD

Quotations on National Missile Defense (NMD)

.
Menzies Campbell, Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs Spokesman
"The arguments against the unilateral deployment of a national missile defence system by the US remain compelling. It would threaten the balance of NATO, encourage the modernisation of nuclear arsenals and undermine the non-proliferation regime. And it would undermine the principle of deterrence on which the fragile strategic balance has been built." (15 November 2001, The Guardian, "Cutting a Wider Deal")

Tony Blair, UK Prime Minister
Replying during Prime Minister's Questions in the House of Commons “I do not agree with those who are opposed to it [NMD]. During the summit with President Bush in February, we made it clear that we were prepared to look at defensive as well as offensive systems.” (24 October 2001, Hansard)

Malcolm Savidge MP, Chair of the All Party Working Group on Non-Proliferation
“We are hoping that the Foreign Secretary and the Prime Minister will put the policies of the party, British interests and world safety before the obsessions of some in the American Government. While we should be standing with the people of the USA, we should not be slavishly following them.” (1 October 2001, The Times, Hostility to US Policy will Erupt at Fringe)

Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, Chief of the Defense Staff
"There's no point in completely impoverishing ourselves in order to provide ourselves with a defence against one particular system and not being able to do anything else ... As far as I'm concerned there is no way I'm in the position to suggest we can pay for any missile defence technology from within the existing defence budget and carry on doing what we are doing at the moment."

"We must make sure we don't leave out the Russians or indeed the Chinese ... We must be sensible about how we work with them, we - the west in general - and the Americans in particular." It was important, he said, for the west to "move forward with the Russians alongside us rather than in confrontation, political confrontation". (28 July 2001, The Guardian, "Military Chief Casts Doubt on Star Wars")

Letter from 18 Trade Union Leaders to the Guardian
The letter argued that NMD would do “immense damage to international treaties covering weapons of mass destruction” and that it would be “wholly inappropriate for our government to support this initiative and [we] strongly urge it not to do so.” (14 June 2001, The Guardian)

Menzies Campbell, Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs Spokesman
"No matter how this is dressed up, President Bush has taken this decision in the teeth of the opposition and anxiety of his European allies. There is a real risk that strategic stability will be undermined and that the nuclear multilateral non-proliferation regime will be prejudiced. NMD is an unproved weapon system with a great deal of political fallout.” (1 May 2001, BBC News Online, “UK Welcomes Bush Missile Talks”)

Sir Charles Guthrie, Chief of the Defense Staff:
"What I think we have to do is talk to the Americans, the rest of Europe has to talk to America, and make quite sure that the balance of destruction in the world is not made worse by this - I don't see why it should be." (12 February 2001, Guardian, "Missile shield 'would cost UK billions")

Peter Hain, UK Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
"We have made it clear that any means to go down the road of the National Missile Defence System (NMD) must be, as an absolute pre-condition, by an agreement with the Russians. An agreement to amend the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty would be required. We don't want to see that abrogated unilaterally by the Americans. If this happened, it would be extremely dangerous and could unleash a world arms race involving Russia, China and so on." (3 December 2000, The Hindu, "Never say nuclear")

Robin Cook, UK Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
"The Government has repeatedly made clear that it values the stability which the ABM Treaty provides, and wishes to see it preserved ... At no point has the Government given the U.S. Administration reason to assume unqualified cooperation with NMD deployment: nor has the U.S. Administration at any stage sought such assurances." (24 October 2000, Response to Foreign Affairs Committee Eighth Report, "Weapons of Mass Destruction")

Menzies Campbell MP, Liberal Democrat Foreign Affairs Spokesman
“Liberal Democrats in government would be unequivocally firm in opposition to proposals for a National Missile Defence system which would unilaterally break the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty. Break the ABM treaty and the post-Cold War consensus on disarmament will be fractured; the gains of START I and START II will be undermined. Break the treaty and we will unleash a new Asian nuclear arms race led by China with a corresponding and chilling escalation by India and Pakistan - a domino theory in reverse.” (Address to Liberal Democrat Conference, 18 September 2000)

Spokesman for the UK Foreign and Commonwealth Office
On President Clinton's decision to delay deployment of NMD: "The Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon and the Foreign Secretary Robin Cook welcome the measured response Clinton has taken, especially taking into account the views of allies and other interested parties." (8 August 2000, Foreign and Commonwealth Office)

Donald Anderson, UK Member of Parliament and Chairman of the House of Commons Committee on Foreign Affairs
"[NMD] is wrong internationally and gives the illusion that it will give the US invulnerability. We should make crystal clear to the US that it cannot take our co-operation for granted . . . and express our scepticism." (3 August 2000, London Daily Telegraph, “Westminster Backlash Over ‘Son of Star Wars’”)

UK Parliament House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee
"We are concerned that the USA over-emphasises the capability component of the threat equation, when it comes to assessing the extent of the threat it faces, and attaches too little importance to intention." (Paragraph #40)

"For our part, we wish to emphasize strongly that our concern about US plans for NMD does not stem from opposition to, or even indifference to, our closest ally's desire to protect itself: the question is whether the additional security that NMD might offer outweighs the negative impact of its deployment on strategic arms control…Other methods of meeting the threat posed by WMD, such as diplomatic persuasion, arms control, deterrence and other defensive measures, might also prove to be as effective and do not generate such difficulties for strategic stability." (Paragraph #49)

"We recommend that the Government articulate the very strong concerns that have been expressed about NMD within the UK. We are not convinced that the US plans to deploy NMD represent an appropriate response to the proliferation problems faced by the international community. We recommend that the government encourage the USA to seek other ways of reducing the threats it perceives." (Paragraph #50) (2 August 2000, Eighth Report, "Weapons of Mass Destruction")

Peter Hain, UK Minister of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
"This system has not been tested. It's vulnerable to decoys and all sorts of other technological devices. And when the Americans decide to proceed, and I really do urge caution on behalf of the Conservative Opposition on this matter, then we will consider it." (21 June 2000, The Times (London), "Hain cautious over American missile shield")

Geoffrey Hoon, UK Defense Minister
"We assess that there is no significant threat to the UK from nuclear weapons at present, but developments continue to be monitored closely. We remain committed to limiting the proliferation of nuclear weapons through our international treaty obligations, and national programmes."
(5 June 2000, Parliament debate)

British Debate on Use of Fylingdales in US NMD Plans

Peter Hain, UK Minister of State for Foreign
and Commonwealth Affairs
“I don't like the idea of a Star Wars programme, limited or unlimited… Any decision it [the US] makes must be done in close co-operation and agreement with the Russians, because they are party to the anti-ballistic missile treaty.” (20 March 2000, Interview, BBC Newsnight)

Geoffrey Hoon, UK Defense Minister
“The history of our close friendship with the US is that we are sympathetic to such requests.” (20 March 2000, Interview, Channel 4)

Iain Duncan Smith, Conservative Defense Spokesman
“It is the Foreign Office versus the MoD on this, that is clear. They are hopelessly split.”

Back to British Nuclear Policy

Back to the European NMD Debate

Back to Nuclear and WMD