The Commission’s concluding report, published on 1 July 2014, is intended to inform a more considered debate over Britain’s nuclear weapon policy focused on national security, mindful of the politics and the strategic and diplomatic context. This is a direct response to the report and represents the views of the author. BASIC publishes it here as part of an ongoing discussion.
Trident Commission
Beyond the Trident Commission Report
The Trident Commission report on Britain’s nuclear weapons policy aims to distill core national security arguments and challenge vague pro-renewal stances. Public and political engagement remain minimal despite the crucial timing and evolving global threats. The Commission debates Britain’s independent nuclear deterrence and its role in NATO, ultimately questioning the alignment of current policies with global disarmament goals.
Building Dialogue: The Trident Commission and our nuclear future
Dialogue is the most crucial ingredient in determining a future where we no longer live in the shadow of nuclear destruction. Without dialogue we will not be able to overcome the widespread orthodoxy that claims it is now impossible for nuclear weapons to be abolished. Without dialogue we will not be able to convince potential proliferators not to take the nuclear path.
U.K. Independent Panel: Retain Trident Subs, But Explore Delay Options
The Trident Commission, spearheaded by BASIC, launched its concluding report on July 1st, and it is expected to add significant value to the debate on whether or not to keep Britain’s nuclear deterrent. An article by Elaine Grossman in the National Journal explores the various viewpoints concerning the report's findings, and emphasizes BASIC's involvement as the organizers of the report. The article does not argue a stance, but rather clearly and in some detail lays out the arguments and counterarguments advances by the report and those in opposition to its conclusions.
Nuclear deterrent ‘must be renewed’
The Trident Commission, spearheaded by BASIC, launched its concluding report on July 1st, and it is expected to add significant value to the debate on whether or not to keep Britain’s nuclear deterrent. An article in the Halifax Courier considers the report's findings from multiple viewpoints, including commentary from Admiral Zambellas, First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff, who argues that the UK requires a “credible deterrent” which means a full complement of four nuclear submarines and two aircraft carriers.
Trident fury: As Scotland is hit by public service cuts, UK government report calls for £130 billion nuclear replacement
The Trident Commission, spearheaded by BASIC, launched its concluding report on July 1st, and it is expected to add significant value to the debate on whether or not to keep Britain’s nuclear deterrent. An article in The Daily Record neatly demonstrates the opposition to the Trident programme and the Commission's findings by SNP Politicians. The article further states that the cost of the Trident successor programme would be £130 billion, which is a massively inflated figure from what the report itself found, £20-30 billion over a period of twenty years.
A like-for-like Trident replacement isn’t justifiable in terms of security or cost
The Trident Commission, spearheaded by BASIC, launched its concluding report on July 1st, and it is expected to add significant value to the debate on whether or not to keep Britain’s nuclear deterrent. An article by Danny Alexander in The Guardian largely agrees with the findings of the Commission, but argues that Continuous at Sea Deterrence should be scaled back by cutting the number of Successor submarines from four to three.
Trident report: UK at risk from nuclear attack
The Trident Commission, spearheaded by BASIC, launched its concluding report on July 1st, and it is expected to add significant value to the debate on whether or not to keep Britain’s nuclear deterrent. An article in The Scotsman summarizes the findings of the report and includes commentary by Deputy First Minister Nicola Sturgeon who argues that the September referendum on Scottish independence is an opportunity to abolish Trident from Scotland before it has to share in the cost of the programme.