UK Nuclear Weapons Policy and Diplomacy

SNP MP blasts Trident ‘factsheet’ as short on facts

Andrew Learmonth from the National wrote an article outlining the criticisms of SNP MP, Kirsten Oswald, regarding a recently published factsheet by the UK Government on Trident. The article goes on to cite BASIC in outlining the projected costs of Trident renewal, and pulls quotes directly from a recent publication written by Dr. Nick Ritchie. 

Feeding the ‘Monster’: Escalating Capital Costs for the Trident Successor Programme

In October 2015 Jon Thomson, Permanent Under Secretary at the Ministry of Defence, described the Trident Successor programme as a “monster” that kept him up at night, “the biggest project the Ministry of Defence will ever take on” and “an incredibly complicated area in which to try to estimate future costs.”

Trident is Vulnerable

A debate is now raging over BASIC's exposure of the threat emerging technologies present to the future viability of Trident submarines. The Ministry of Defence (MoD) states they do not believe it is a problem, and that even if it were submarines would still be the best, most stealthy platform for nuclear missiles. The confidence implied in the MoD's public line is unjustified, and must surely cover up a deep concern held by strategists for the future viability of its most expensive weapon system.

14419385728 879064f71a z

Making Sense of the Trident Debate Requires an Open Mind – In Defence of Emily Thornberry

It has always astounded me how little attention people have paid to risk and future developments when debating Trident. It's a debate that heats the passions up more than most, because it deals with such visceral things as security and morality, and acts as a proxy for political identity. All too often people revert to established positions, comfortable that they are right, even if they lose.