1 ‘This Fight Will be Long and Hard’ Speech by Geoff Hoon, secretary of state for defence, Labour Party conference, Brighton, 2 October 2001.

 2 Strategic Defence Review, The Stationery Office, Cm 3999, July 1998, para 64.

 3 Ibid., para 66.

 4 A Fresh Start for Britain: Labour’s Strategy for Britain in the Modern World, The Labour Party, 1996.

 5 Statement on the Defence Estimates 1995: Stable Forces in a Strong Britain, HMSO, Cm 2800, May 1995, p.38.

 6 The Strategic Defence Review: Supporting Essays, The Stationery Office, July 1998.

 7 Official Report, House of Commons, July 30 1998, col. 452.

 8 Op Cit. Supporting Essays, p19 para. 68.

 9 Op Cit. Supporting Essays p17 para. 62.

 10 Op Cit. A Fresh Start for Britain.

 11 Official Report, House of Lords, 29 October 1998, WA 224.

 12 ‘Declaration on a Transformed North Atlantic Alliance’, issued by the Heads of State and Government participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council, London, 6 July 1990.

 13 Nassauer, Otfried, ‘NATO Nuclear Strategies 1996’, unpublished presentation to Pugwash Meeting No 221, 25th Workshop on Nuclear Forces, Problems in Achieving a Nuclear-Weapons-Free World, London, 25-27 October 1996.

 14 PDD 60 is not in the public domain, but there has been some speculation as to its content in the press. See, for example, Smith, R. Jeffrey, ‘Clinton Directive Changes Strategy on Nuclear Arms’, The Washington Post, 7 December 1997.

 15 ‘Press Conference by Secretary of State Albright’, Brussels, 8 December 1998; see also Evans, Michael , ‘NATO Rejects Call to Cut Nuclear Arms’, The Times, 9 December 1998.

 16 ‘The Alliance’s Strategic Concept’, approved by the Heads of State and Government participating in the Meeting of the North Atlantic Council, Washington D.C., 23-24 April 1999.

 17 ‘No First Use: The Time Has Come’, Remarks by Ambassador Thomas Graham, Jr., 27 October 1998.

 18 Official Report, House of Commons, 4 December 1997, column 577.

 19 Op Cit. Supporting Essays, pp. 5-11.

 20 Ibid.

 21 Official Report, House of Lords, 29 October 1998, WA 224.

 22 Defending Against the Threat: Chemical and Biological Weapons, Ministry of Defence, July 1999, Chapter 3.

 23 ‘No First Use: The Time Has Come’, Remarks by Ambassador Thomas Graham, Jr., 27 October 1998

 24 Op Cit. Strategic Defence Review, para 63.

 25 ‘UK Defence Strategy; A Continuing Role for Nuclear Weapons?’, Speech by the secretary of state for defence, Malcolm Rifkind, Ministry of Defence, 16 November 1993.

 26 Progress of the Trident Programme, House of Commons Defence Committee, HC 297 of Session 1993-94, p.13.

 27 Ibid, p.x.

 28 ‘Minutes of Evidence taken before the Defence Committee’, HC 138-II of Session 1998-99, p.16, para 180.

 29 A New Beginning, AWE Annual Report 2000, 2 August 2001, available at the AWE web site, http://www.awe.co.uk

 30 Defence Committee, The Strategic Defence Review, Volume I, HC 138-I, 10 September 1998.

 31 Ibid.

 32 Confidence, Security and Verification, AWE Study Report, available at the Ministry of Defence web site, http://www.mod.uk

 33 HC 138-I of Session 1998-99, page ixv, para 151.

 34 Ministry of Defence Annual Reporting Cycle, House of Commons Defence Committee, HC 158 of Session 1999-2000.

 35 The MOD’s Annual Reporting Cycle 2000-01, House of Commons Defence Committee, HC 144 of Session 2000-2001, 9 May 2001.

 36 Ibid.

 37 ‘Joint Statement by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair’, Washington D.C., 23 February 2001.

 38 Clark, David, ‘A True Friend is an Honest Friend’, The Observer, 15 July 2001.

 39 ‘Agreement between the Government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Government of the United States of America for Co-operation on the Uses of Atomic Energy for Mutual Defence Purposes’, signed in Washington, 3 July 1958.

 40 The Joint Atomic Information Exchange Group was established in 1959 by the US Department of Energy (DoE) and the US Department of Defense (DoD). It controls the release of nuclear weapons information to countries with which the United States has nuclear co-operation agreements (e.g. the UK and NATO allies).

 41 Annual Historical Summary (U), Joint Atomic Information Exchange Group, HQ, Defense Nuclear Agency, 1 October 1982 – 30 September 1983. Document released under the Freedom of Information Act.

 42 Op Cit. Supporting Essays, para 14.

 43 Progress of the Trident Programme, House of Commons Defence Committee, HC 350 of Session 1994-1995, p.24, Q.10.

 44 Official Report, House of Commons, 12 January 1998, column 140.

 45 Official Report, House of Commons, 13 January 1998, column 135.

 46 Official Report, House of Commons, 14 December 1999, column 93W.

 47 Hunting-BRAE Annual Report, 1998, p. 41.

 48 Op Cit. A New Beginning.

 49 Ibid.

 50 Ibid.

 51 Official Report, House of Commons, 5 July 1999, Column 341.

 52 See, for example, Civiak, Dr. Robert, Soaring Cost, Shrinking Performance: The Status of the National Ignition Facility, Tri-Valley CAREs, April 2001, available at http://www.igc.org/tvc/prapr01.htm

 53 Op Cit. A New Beginning.

 54 Ibid.

 55 Department of Energy Press Release, reprinted in Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue No.49, August 2000.

 56 Official Report, House of Commons, 30 June 1999, column 159 and 13 January 1998, column 135.

 57 Op Cit, AWE Annual Report, 2000.

 58 Ibid.

 59 The MOD’s Annual Reporting Cycle 2000-01, House of Commons Defence Committee, HC 144 of Session 2000-2001, 9 May 2001.

 60 The Future United Kingdom Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Force, The Defence Council, Ministry of Defence, Defence Open Government Document 80/23, July 1980.

 61 The Future United Kingdom Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Force, The Defence Council, Ministry of Defence, Defence Open Government Document 80/23, July 1980.

 62 The United Kingdom Trident Programme, The Defence Council, Ministry of Defence, Defence Open Government Document 82/1, March 1982.

 63 Op Cit, The Future United Kingdom Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Force. The post of SACEUR is always held by a senior member of the US military, reporting to the US Administration and Congress. The post is currently held by General Joseph Ralston of the US Air Force.

 64 ‘The British Strategic Nuclear Force: Text of Letters exchanged between the Prime Minister and the President of the United States and between the Secretary of State for Defence and the US Secretary of Defense’, Cmnd 8517, 11 March 1982.

 65 Op Cit, The Future United Kingdom Strategic Nuclear Deterrent Force.

 66 Op Cit. Supporting Essays p. 6-17.

 67 ‘NATO’s Strategy Review: A Litmus Test for NATO-Russia Relations’, BITS Research Note 97.5, Berlin-Information-Centre for Transatlantic Security, December 1997.

 68 NATO’s strategy of Mutually Assured Destruction was set out in North Atlantic Military Committee Decision MC14/2, 23 May 1957, which was de-classified in 1999. MC14/2 describes the probable nature of a future general war involving NATO as an "all-out nuclear exchange" with "maximum destruction" occurring "within the first few days as both sides strove to exploit their nuclear stockpiles to gain nuclear superiority".

 69 NATO’s strategy of Flexible Response was set out in North Atlantic Military Committee Decision MC 14/3, 16 January 1968, which superseded MC14/2. MC14/3 envisaged three types of NATO military responses to aggression moving from "Direct Defence", to "Deliberate Escalation", and finally "General Nuclear Response".

 70 ‘Joint Statement by President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair’, Washington D.C., 23 February 2001.

 71 ‘Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Request for Advisory Opinion by the General Assembly of the United Nations)’, Communique, International Court of Justice, 8 July 1996.

 72 Official Report, House of Lords, 26 January 1998, columns 7-8.

 73 ‘Press Briefing’, Trident Ploughshares, 27 April 1998, available at http://www.tridentploughshares.org

 74 Trident Ploughshares Website http://www.gn.apc.org/tp2000/index.html

 75 ‘Greenock 1999 Case Summary’, Trident Ploughshares, available at http://www.tridentploughshares.org

 76 A detailed analysis of the Scottish High Court’s decision is available in ‘The Unlawfulness of the United Kingdom’s Policy of Nuclear Deterrence: The Invalidity of the Scottish High Court’s Decision in Zelter’, Charles Moxley, Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue No.58, June 2001.

 77 ‘People’s Disarmament’, Angie Zelter, Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue No.58, June 2001. The Poll was conducted on a sample of 977 adults between 22 February and 4 March 2001 by NFO System Three on behalf of Scottish CND. Only 24 per cent of those questioned were opposed to the Trident Ploughshares action.

 78 ‘Press Briefing’, Trident Ploughshares, 4 October 2001, available at http://www.tridentploughshares.org

 79 ‘NRDC Nuclear Notebook; US nuclear forces, 2001’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, March/April 2001.

 80 ‘Remarks by the President to Students and Faculty at National Defense University’, 1 May 2001, available at http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2001/05/20010501-10.html

 81 Nitze, Paul H., ‘A Threat Mostly To Ourselves’, New York Times, 28 October 1999.

 82 Arkin, William M., ‘New Nukes’, Washington Post, 23 April 2001.

 83 Schwartz, Stephen I., ‘The New-Nuke Chorus Tunes Up’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, July/August 2001.

 84 Barry, John and Thomas, Evan, ‘Dropping the Bomb’, Newsweek, 25 June 2001.

 85 Arkin, William M., ‘The Emerging Nuclear Posture’, Washingtonpost.com, 30 July 2001.

 86 Ibid.

 87 ‘President Bush, Russian President Putin Discuss New Relationship’, Office of the White House Press Secretary, 13 November 2001.

 88 Gordon, Michael R. ‘U.S. Arsenal: Treaties Vs. Nontreaties’, New York Times, 14 November 2001.

 89 ‘President Bush, Russian President Putin Discuss New Relationship’, Office of the White House Press Secretary, 13 November 2001.

 90 Op Cit. Strategic Defence Review, para 70.

 91 ‘Statement by President of the Russian Federation Vladimir V. Putin’, 13 November 2000.

 92 ‘Speech Given by M. Jacques Chirac, President of France’, Paris, 27 August 2001.

 93 Sheridan, Michael, ‘Trident could be bargained away to save arms treaty’, The Independent, 28 February 1995.

 94 Byers, Michael, ‘Back to the Cold War?’ London Review of Books, Vol 22, No 12, 22 June 2000.

 95 John Bolton was quoted by Senator Byron Dorgan (D - ND) during Bolton’s confirmation hearing. See ‘Nomination of John Robert Bolton of Maryland to be Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security –Resumed’, Senate, 8 May 2001.

 96 For more information on the Biological Weapons Convention protocol negotiations, see , Crowley, Michael, Disease by Design: De-mystifying the Biological Weapons Debate BASIC Research Report 2001.2, available at http://www.basicint.org/BWreport.htm

 97 Butler, Richard, ‘Nuclear Testing And National Honor’, New York Times, 13 July 2001.

 98 The PNAC website is at http://www.newamericancentury.org

 99 Rebuilding America’s Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for a New Century, Project for a New American Century, September 2000, available at http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pd

 100 Statement of Principles, Project for a New American Century, 3 June 199, available at7 http://www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

 101 Rationale and Requirements for U.S. Nuclear Forces and Arms Control, Volume I Executive Report, National Institute for Public Policy, January 2001, available at  http://www.nipp.org/Adobe/volume%201%20complete.pdf

 102 ‘Statement of Admiral Richard W. Mies, USN Commander in Chief United States Strategic Command Before the Senate Armed Services Committee Strategic on Command Posture’, 11 July 2001, available at http://www.senate.gov/%7Earmed_services/statemnt/2001/010711mies.pdf

 103 ‘Bush Defense Plan Stirs Critics’, Associated Press, 2 May 2001.

 104 For further analysis of the Bush administration’s position on the weaponisation of space and proposals for an alternative approach, see Johnson, Rebecca, ‘Multilateral Approaches to Preventing the Weaponisation of Space’, Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue No. 56, April 2001.

 105 See for example, ‘Joint Statement by the President of the Russian Federation and the President of the French Republic on Strategic Issues, Moscow, July 2, 2001’, Russian Foreign Ministry translation, Document 1269-03-07-2001, 3 July 2001.

 106 For the full text of the NPT see http://www.basicint.org/nuk_npttext.htm

 107 ‘Final Communiqué, Ministerial Meeting of the North Atlantic Council’, Budapest, 29-30 May 2001, available at http://www.nato.int/docu/pr/2001/p01-077e.htm

 108 ‘Joint Statement by President George W. Bush and President Vladimir V. Putin on a New Relationship Between the United States and Russia’ Office of the White House Press Secretary, 13 November 2001.

 109 ‘Media Roundtable with USD (P) Feith’, News Transcript, United States Department of Defense, 4 September 2001, available at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/t09052001_t904usdp.html

 110 For more information on the debate behind the Fort Greely test-bed facility see Gronlund, Lisbeth and Wright, David, ‘The Alaska Test Bed Fallacy: Missile Defense Deployment Goes Stealth’, Arms Control Today, September 2001.

 111 ‘Statement of Admiral Richard W. Mies, USN, Commander in Chief United States Strategic Command, before the Senate Armed Services Committee Strategic Subcommittee on Command Posture’, 11 July 2001, available at http://www.senate.gov/%7Earmed_services/statemnt/2001/010711mies.pdf

 112 ‘Presidential Election Forum: The Candidates on Arms Control’, Arms Control Today, September 2000, available at http://www.armscontrol.org/ACT/sept00/pressept00.html

 113 ‘Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense-designate Senate Confirmation Hearings’, 11 January 2001, available at http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/resources/bushadminnukepolicy.htm

 114 Shanker, Thom and Sanger, David E., ‘White House Wants To Bury Pact Banning Tests Of Nuclear Arms’, New York Times, 7 July 2001.

 115 Johnson, Rebecca, ‘High Level CTBT Meeting "Successful" despite US Boycott’, 13 November 2001. Available at the Acronym Institute for Disarmament Diplomacy’s web site at http://www.acronym.org.uk/ctbt.

 116 UN Press Release, GA/DIS/3217, 5 November 2001.

117 For more information on the conference, see United Nations web site, http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/WMD/ctbt/article_iv/index.html

 118 Landay, Jonathan S., ‘U.S. Cool To Nuclear Test-Ban Conference’, Philadelphia Inquirer, 7 September 2001.

 119 Op Cit, Johnson, Rebecca.

 120 Conference on Facilitating the Entry into Force of the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty, Press Release No. DC/2820, 13 November 2001.

 121 Shalikashvili, General John M., ‘Findings and Recommendations Concerning the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty’, (US, Ret.), January 2001, Section VI, available at http://www.state.gov/www/global/arms/ctbtpage/ctbt_report.html#vi

 122 ‘Deputy Secretary Wolfowitz Interview with Radio Correspondents’, News Transcript, US Department of Defense, 29 June 2001, available at http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/resources/bushadminnukepolicy.htm

 123 Butler, Richard, ‘Nuclear Testing And National Honor’, New York Times, 13 July 2001.

 124 Website of the National Nuclear Security Administration. Available at http://www.nnsa.doe.gov/

 125 Sanger, David E. ‘U.S. To Tell China It Will Not Object To Missile Buildup’, New York Times, 2 September 2001.

 126 ‘Nomination of John Robert Bolton of Maryland to be Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security –Resumed’, Senate, 8 May 2001, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r107:2:./temp/~r107ZKJhEL:e11776:

 127 Ambitions for Britain, The Labour Party Election Manifesto, 2001.

 128 ‘Eliminating Nuclear Arsenals: The NPT Pledge And What It Means (Text of a speech, reproduced with kind permission of Under-Secretary-General Dhanapala, delivered to the UK All-Party Group on Global Security and Non-Proliferation, house of Commons, London, July 3, 2000)’, Jayantha Dhanapala, Disarmament Diplomacy, June 2000.

 129 ‘Britain Ratifies Nuclear Test Ban’, Press Release, UK Foreign & Commonwealth Office, 6 April 2001.

 130 ‘A Treaty We All Need’, Prime Minister Tony Blair, President Jacques Chirac & Chancellor Gerhard Schröder, The New York Times, 8 October 1999.

 131 ‘U.S. Senate Rejection of Test Ban’, Early Day Motion 929, UK Parliamentary Session 98/99, 20 November 1999, available at http://edm.ais.co.uk/weblink/html/motion.html/EDMI_SES=98/ref=929

 132 The poll was commissioned by the Oxford Research Group and released in March 1999, full details available at http://www.oxfrg.demon.co.uk/main%20frame%20-%20programmes.htm

 133 Ambitions for Britain, The Labour Party Election Manifesto, 2001.

 134 Smith, R. Jeffrey, ‘Clinton Directive Changes Strategy on Nuclear Arms’, The Washington Post, 7 December 1997.

 135 Rationale and Requirements for U.S. Nuclear Forces and Arms Control, Volume I Executive Report, National Institute for Public Policy, January 2001 http://www.nipp.org/Adobe/volume%201%20complete.pdf

 136 Interview with Paul Robinson published in Kitfield, James, ‘National Lab Director Makes the Case for New Nukes’, Government Executive Magazine, 11 September 2001.

 137 Ibid.

 138 Younger, Stephen M., Nuclear Weapons in the Twenty-First Century, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 27 June 2000, available at http://lib-www.lanl.gov/la-pubs/00393603.pdf

 139 The legislation is the Furse-Spratt Provision in the FY94 Defense Authorization Bill. For more information see http://www.fcnl.org/issues/arm/minnukeindx.htm

 140 ‘Controversy Rages Over Perry Nuclear Comments’, Reuters, 3 May 1996.

 141 ‘Bush Letter Warns Saddam of Stakes: ‘War Choice is Yours to Make,’ President Says in Rejected Message’, Washington Post, 13 January 1991.

 142 O’Hanlon, Michael, Technological Change and the Future of Warfare, (Brookings Press, 2000) p.166.

 143 Rationale and Requirements for U.S. Nuclear Forces and Arms Control, Volume I Executive Report, National Institute for Public Policy, January 2001.

 144 ‘U.S. Pressed on Nuclear Response: A Policy of Less Ambiguity, More Pointed Threat is Urged’ Washington Post, 5 October 2001.

 145 See Krepinevich, Andrew F. and Martinage, Robert C. The Transformation of Strategic-Strike Operations, Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, March 2001.

 146 Rationale and Requirements for U.S. Nuclear Forces and Arms Control, Volume I Executive Report, National Institute for Public Policy, January 2001, available at http://www.nipp.org/Adobe/volume%201%20complete.pdf

 147 ‘Secretary Rumsfeld Interview for ABC News This Week Secretary’, News Transcript, US Department of Defense, 16 September 2001, available at http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2001/t09162001_t0916sd.html

 148 ‘UK Defence Strategy; A Continuing Role for Nuclear Weapons?’, speech by the secretary of state for defence, Malcolm Rifkind, Ministry of Defence, 16 November 1993.

 149 ‘Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons (Request for an Advisory Opinion by the United Nations General Assembly), Statement by the United Kingdom’, International Court of Justice, June 1995.

 150 Nelson, Robert W., ‘Low-Yield Earth-Penetrating Nuclear Weapons’, The Journal of the Federation of American Scientists, Volume 54, Number 1, January/February 2001.

 151 ‘US Department of Energy FY2002 Budget Request, Proposed Appropriation Language’, 25 April 2001, available at http://www.senate.gov/%7Earmed_services/hearings/2001/f010425.htm

 152 ‘Statement of John A. Gordon, Under Secretary for Nuclear Security and Administrator, National Nuclear Security Administration, US Department of Energy, before the Sub-Committee on Strategic Forces, Senate Armed Services Committee’, 25 April 2001.

 153 Op Cit. A New Beginning.

 154 ‘US Department of Energy FY2002 Budget Request, Proposed Appropriation Language’, 25 April 2001, available at http://www.senate.gov/%7Earmed_services/hearings/2001/f010425.htm 

 155 Mello, Greg, ‘That Old Designing Fever’, Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, January/February 2000.

 156 Ibid.

 157 ‘Statement of C. Paul Robinson, Sandia National Laboratories, before the Sub-Committee on Strategic Forces, Senate Armed Services Committee’, 25 April 2001.

 158 Op Cit. A New Beginning.

 159 ‘Stockpile Stewardship and Management Plan’, US Department of Energy Office of Defense Programs, 29 February 1996, p.II-7 (otherwise known as ‘The Green Book’).

 160 Op Cit. A New Beginning.

 161 Ibid.

 162 Ibid.

 163 Ibid.

 164 Aronson, LCDR Bob and Woods, LCDR Mike, (CNO Staff), ‘Mission Report, Trident Hull and Missile Life Extensions Approved’, http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/cno/n87/usw/autumn98/mission.htm

 165 ‘NRDC Nuclear Notebook; US nuclear forces, 2001’, Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, March/April 2001, pp 77-79.

 166 Robinson, C. Paul, A White Paper: Pursuing a New Nuclear Weapons Policy for the 21st Century, Los Alamos Study Group, March 2001, available at http://www.lasg.org/whatsnew/whatsnew1_a.html

 167 Ibid.

 168 Ibid.

 169 Brooks, Linton F., ‘Arms Control and the Future Sub Force’, Undersea Warfare: The Official Magazine of the U.S. Submarine Force, Vol. 3 No. 3, Spring 2001.

 170 Ibid.

 171 Green, Robert, ‘Conventionally Armed UK Trident?’, Disarmament Diplomacy, Issue No. 56, April 2001.

 172 Ibid.

 173 ‘The Royal Navy’s Tomahawk Land Attack Missile’, UK Defence News and Events, available at Ministry of Defence Website, http://news.mod.uk/veritas/tlam.htm

 174 Op cit. Green, Robert.

 175 Ambitions for Britain, The Labour Party Election Manifesto, 2001.

 176 Ibid.

 177 ‘US Diplomat – Missile Shield Vital After Attacks’, Reuters, 17 September 2001.

 178 Interview with Paul Robinson published in Kitfield, James, ‘National Lab Director Makes the Case for New Nukes’, Government Executive Magazine, 11 September 2001.

 179 ‘Doctrine for Joint Nuclear Operations’, Joint Pub 3-12, 18 December 1995.

 180 The 13 ‘hold-outs’ are: Algeria, China, Colombia, North Korea, Democratic Republic of Congo, Egypt, India, Indonesia, Iran, Israel, Pakistan, United States, and Vietnam.

 181 Weapons of Mass Destruction, Foreign Affairs Select Committee, Eighth Report, Session 1999-2000, 2 August 2000.

 182 Sanger, David E., ‘U.S. To Tell China It Will Not Object To Missile Buildup’, New York Times, 2 September 2001.

 183 Nichols, Bill, ‘Pakistan’s Nuclear Arsenal a Source of Worry’, USA Today, 27 September 2001.

 184 Defence Open Government Document 80/23, p.23.

 185 See, for example, The UK Role in Arms Control - a short guide to British Government policy, Foreign and Commonwealth Office, Second Edition, April 1990, p.15.

 186 ‘Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs Douglas Hurd’s speech to the NPT Review Conference of 1995’, Press Release, United Kingdom Mission to the United Nations New York, 18 April 1995.

 187 Op Cit. Strategic Defence Review, p. 19, para 70.

 188 Op cit, International Court of Justice Communique, 8 July 1996

 189 ‘Systematic and progressive efforts to reduce nuclear weapons globally: a food for thought paper’ NPT/CONF.2000/23, 2000 Review Conference of the Parties to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, Submitted by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, 4 May 2000.

 190 Evidence before the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, 28 June 2000.

 191 Op Cit. Robert Green.

Contents | Executive Summary | Acronyms | Introduction | Chapter 1 | Chapter 2 | Chapter 3
  Chapter 4 | Chapter 5 | Chapter 6 | Chapter 7 | Chapter 8 | Appendix 1 | Appendix 2
 Endnotes