The lifetime costs – £5bn, or 40% of the defense equipment budget – is unjustifiable at a time of tightening public budgets
Trident
Don’t rush: The benefits of not replacing Trident could be considerable
What kind of relationship do we want to have with the rest of the world?
Don’t rush: Premature replacement of Trident could be costly
Why not, instead, invest in better equipment, pay and conditions for our troops?
Oceans of Work: Arms Conversion Revisited
In 1987, The Barrow Alternative Employment Committee argued for UK marine civil engineering opportunities, rather than nuclear submarine production, for its skilled local workforce.
Trident: Do we really need to make the decision now?
The current rush is unnecessary, reduces military flexibility and interoperability with the US, undermines the NPT and stymies an open debate.
Nuclear deterrence: A tried and tested defense strategy or an elaborate belief system masquerading as scientific theory?
Blair has turned a six-year opportunity to discuss replacing Trident into a six-month rubber-stamping exercise
US ‘Prompt Global Strike’ Capability: A new destabilising sub-state deterrent in the making?
Congress should eliminate the million earmarked to convert Trident II D-5 SLBMs to carry conventional warheads – and Nato allies should voice opposition to it
The UK Defence Industrial Strategy and alternative approaches
Britain could help project European power in international security