1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Hi Guest, welcome to the TES Community!

    Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.

    Don't forget to look at the how to guide.

    Dismiss Notice

The Yanks have announced a deal has been done with Britain to replace Trident

Discussion in 'Personal' started by Duke of York, Feb 23, 2020.

  1. Duke of York

    Duke of York Star commenter


    "Britain has committed itself to buying a new generation of nuclear warheads to replace Trident, which will be based on US technology. The decision was revealed by Pentagon officials who disclosed it before an official announcement has been made by the government.

    The revelation has dismayed MPs and experts who question why they have learned of the move – which will cost the UK billions of pounds – only after the decision has apparently been made. It has also raised questions about the UK’s commitment to staunching nuclear proliferation and the country’s reliance on the US for a central plank of its defence strategy.

    Earlier this month, Pentagon officials confirmed that its proposed W93 sea-launched warhead, the nuclear tip of the next generation of submarine-launched ballistic missiles, would share technology with the UK’s next nuclear weapon, implying that a decision had been taken between the two countries to work on the programme.

    In public, the UK has not confirmed whether it intends to commission a new nuclear warhead. The Ministry of Defence’s annual update to parliament, published just before Christmas, says only: “Work also continues to develop the evidence to support a government decision when replacing the warhead.”

    But last week Admiral Charles Richard, commander of the US strategic command, told the Senate defence committee that there was a requirement for a new warhead, which would be called the W93 or Mk7. Richard said: “This effort will also support a parallel replacement warhead programme in the United Kingdom, whose nuclear deterrent plays an absolutely vital role in Nato’s overall defence posture.”

    Ed Davey, acting leader of the Liberal Democrats, said: “It is totally unacceptable that the government seems to have given the green light to the development of new nuclear weapon technologies with zero consultation and zero scrutiny. Britain under Johnson increasingly looks like putty in Trump’s hands. That Britain’s major defence decisions are being debated in the United States, but not in the UK, is a scandal. Under Johnson, it seems that where Trump leads, we must follow.”

    Alan Shaffer, Pentagon deputy under-secretary of defense for acquisition and sustainment, also made reference to the new UK programme in a briefing session at the annual nuclear deterrence summit, in Alexandria, Virginia. “I think it’s wonderful that the UK is working on a new warhead at the same time, and I think we will have discussions and be able to share technologies,” Shaffer said.

    David Cullen, director of pressure group the Nuclear Information Service, said: “The UK’s reliance on US knowledge and assistance for their nuclear weapons programme means they will find it almost impossible to diverge from any development path the US decides to take. “We are legally bound to take steps towards disarmament under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty, but this would take us in the opposite direction.”

    It is understood that the US had agreed with the UK not to make any announcement while parliament was in recess. However, US defence officials were apparently oblivious to the agreement and confirmed the programme’s existence – to the embarrassment of the UK government.

    Hans Kristensen, director of the nuclear information project at the Federation of American Scientists, said the development of the new warhead posed significant geopolitical problems. “Britain and the US have come a long away from being leaders in reducing the role of nuclear weapons and contemplating the possible road toward potential disarmament to re-embracing nuclear weapons for the long haul. They are obviously not alone in this, with Russia, China and France doing their own work. So, overall, this is a serious challenge for the international non-proliferation regime,” he said.

    Tom Plant, director of proliferation and nuclear policy at the independent security thinktank, Rusi, said the lack of debate about the new weapon was a concern. “There’s been a presumption from those in opposition and analysts like myself that it should come to parliament in some way, like the 2016 vote on Trident. I suspect that the MoD’s position is that they don’t want it to. What the programme doesn’t need from their perspective is lots of scrutiny. But if there’s going to be a decision it should absolutely come to parliament.”

    The MoD said: “As previously stated in the 2015 defence review, we can confirm that we are working towards replacing the warhead. We have a strong defence relationship with the US and will continue to remain compatible with the US Trident missile. An announcement about the UK’s replacement warhead programme will be made in due course.”

    Any thoughts?
  2. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    The article doesn't make clear why Limey warheads are no longer to be used.
  3. Duke of York

    Duke of York Star commenter

    It gives us an indication what a trade deal will look like.
    emerald52 likes this.
  4. artboyusa

    artboyusa Star commenter

    ****** You got "Limey" in before me. ******
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 24, 2020
    lexus300 and LondonCanary like this.
  5. artboyusa

    artboyusa Star commenter

    A hammer gives us an indication of what a house will look like.
    LondonCanary likes this.
  6. Jude Fawley

    Jude Fawley Star commenter

    What to do with all this money we haven't got? A new coat? A hat? New shoes? Cakes? Lemonade? Sod it! Let's get some ammo.
    ajrowing likes this.
  7. burajda

    burajda Star commenter

    Weve got loads of money, we're the sixth biggest (or maybe 5th or 7th) economy in the world. Its just not distributed too well.
    emerald52 likes this.
  8. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Wasntbtridentviurs but maintained and housed by the US?

    It its an upgrade what's the news?
  9. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

  10. coffeekid

    coffeekid Star commenter

    Another reason out of many for people living here to vote for Scottish independence. Why doesn't the UK govt store it in England???

    "Nuclear weapons have been based in the Clyde for half a century. This is despite the opposition of the people of Scotland, civil society, the STUC, Scotland’s churches, the Scottish Parliament and most of Scotland’s MPs. On 19 July 2016, 58 of Scotland’s 59 MPs voted against the decision to renew the Trident nuclear weapons system.

    The latest Survation poll found that, excluding people who don’t know, 56% of people in Scotland oppose the renewal of Trident.

    What’s more, a 2018 YouGov survey has shown that 47% of Scots support the Scottish Government having the final say over Trident, as opposed to the 33% who support the matter remaining in the hands of the UK Government."
  11. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    I wouldn't trust the SNP and motor mouth to have control of them!
    lexus300 likes this.
  12. coffeekid

    coffeekid Star commenter

    Literally just quoted an excerpt (from the SNP's website) saying the Scottish govt is against nuclear weapons and wants to get rid of them. Your reading comprehension is pitiful. But yeah - SNP bad, Wee Jimmy Krankie, blah blah, blah, Brexit means Brexit, oh fab, we're getting blue passports, hooray.
    ajrowing and CraigCarterSmith like this.
  13. oldsomeman

    oldsomeman Star commenter

    According to some reports they are already exploring other folks to replace Sturgeon. her shouting is doing little to get the independence she says the Scots want.
    The site of the submarine base was being discussed at some time. Seems there was some discussion the Scottish navy? might take it over, or the several thousand Scots who rely on it might just love thier jobs.
    Besides which the Scots would have to find thier own navy,and possiblythe shipyardsmight go if they became independent.
    this article is old and so things might have channged.
    This one is basically the problems for the UK if the Scots become independent.
  14. Duke of York

    Duke of York Star commenter

    The news is that it appears to have been a done deal involving billions of pounds of taxpayers money that never went before parliamentary scrutitiny and approval.
  15. needabreak

    needabreak Star commenter

    Oh. Was the existing system cheaper to buy/maintain and is it as up to date?

    Perhaps they feel they have the mandate after the last GE result.
  16. lexus300

    lexus300 Star commenter

    The Scots have achieved an interesting status, they are against everything all of the time;)
  17. florian gassmann

    florian gassmann Star commenter

    After a five-hour debate on the cost, Parliament agreed to upgrade Trident in July 2016, by a majority of 355 votes (almost all of the conservatives and more than half of labour MPs voted for it).
    Commons votes for Trident renewal by majority of 355
  18. CraigCarterSmith

    CraigCarterSmith Established commenter

    Scotland gets lectured by xenophobic, exceptionalist, sponging retirees with questionable morals

    can't imagine why Independence support is at 52%
    coffeekid and ajrowing like this.
  19. LondonCanary

    LondonCanary Star commenter

    Same reasons as Brexit.
  20. CraigCarterSmith

    CraigCarterSmith Established commenter

    sorry elaborate because Scotland voted to remain so.......

Share This Page