I was pleased to see a report today that Ed Davey, the leader of the minor Liberal Democrat Party is calling for the UK to develop its own indpendent nuclear weapon, citing the instability and unreliablity of Trump.
For readers who don’t know; the UK has about 200 warheads which are fired from submarines (the UK has 4 which can be used for this, though at any one time only one or two actually seem to be working). The missiles are ICBMs, and are supplied by the US, and depend on the US for maintenance. In theory the UK can fire them independently – but I doubt it. There is a definite dependency in terms of upkeep and maintenance. There is the political dependency which would make independent use extremely difficult. And, finally, I doubt whether the UK really has unhindered technical, operational control over the missiles currently in their possession.
It is also the case that the last 2 test firings of the US supplied missiles both failed. [1] So, as a product, they don’t seem very reliable.
It is acceptable nowadays in liberal circles to talk about Trump’s, and therefore America’s, unreliability. But, there is another factor here, which will be less talked about. The most dangerous nuclear armed power in the world today is Israel – an expansionist rogue state which spits on international law. Futhermore; the fanatics at the top of Israel would think nothing of threating the UK were, (one can imagine), the sane, rational voice in support of Palestinian rights and a settlement in the Middle East to come to the front in UK policy making. Currently; the UK has no deterrent against this extreme regime in which religious fanatics seem to dictate policy. That is a problem.
It is worth pointing out that France has its own independent nuclear deterrent, and ICBMs. It is possible. Another option, and the one I would favour, would be considering moving to a more low-key nuclear profile. Nuclear warheads can be delivered with cruise missiles and aircraft borne bombs, though I appreciate these do not provide the same near guarantee of a hit as a ballistic missile. A balanced option might be to develop intermediate range ballistic missiles which could be fired from submarines somewhat closer to their targets. At any event, I would support a strategic debate about the UK shifting to its own deterrent even if that also entailed a somewhat more tactical approach.
Notes