The UK cannot rely on a nuclear defence – Scrap Trident and increase conventional forces
There has been an increasing frequency of Russian spy planes overflying the North Sea and Atlantic ocean not that far off the coast of Scotland. Response from the UK has been patchy, often interception and close monitoring has been, “just in time” by the RAF. This makes a nonsense of recent changes to UK defences which included removal of many planes from Scotland and closure of a number of bases.
At sea there are reports of Russian submarines in the Atlantic, near to the Clyde, not that far away from routes taken by UK nuclear equipped submarines. The UK has no immediate resources available capable of identifying and monitoring the movement of these submarines and have had to call upon the USA to do this.
Also more frequently Russian bombers equipped to carry nuclear weapons have been identified on a number of occasions in the English Channel and in the Atlantic off the coast of Devon having flown from the Artic past the coast of Scotland and Ireland.
The increased Russian presence is of concern since it appears the first the UK is able to positively identify and warn them off is at the time they are close to or entering UK waters.
The on-going testing of the UK defences is clearly driven by events in the Ukraine.
It is evident the UK is lacking surveillance aircraft capable of overflying and monitoring the Arctic area to the North and East of the UK, a situation created by the Con/Dem government forming part of their defence review which slashed conventional equipment replacement programmes in favour of retaining and indeed upgrading the Trident nuclear weapons defence system.
I published this blog article many months ago warning of the folly of moving defence dependence of the country away from conventional forces to nuclear. I do hope the chickens do not come home to roost. There is still time to do as the Americans wish. That is to give up Trident and transfer UK dependence on nuclear cover to the USA.
It is preferable to be protected by a 2000+ warhead umbrella as opposed to the 60+ the UK might be able to gather for use. which would be a once only option since it would be taking the country down the road of mutual destruction. Unthinkable but!!!
This is what I wrote when the Trident replacement was being considered at a time when the UK voters were being forced to accept stringently applied austerity cuts. Money was very tight and the young and elderly suffered. So what did the Government do. It scrapped an expensively overspent project aimed at repacing the UK’s airdefence system that had been inoperable for some time, a gap covered, at an extortionately cost to the UK taxpayer, by the US air force.
Then making matters more intolerable the Nimrod MRA4 replacement plane was much delayed and horrendeslly over spent leaving, “big hole” in the UK’s defences.
The all British, “Spy in the Sky” Nimrod MRA4 surveillance and reconnaissance plane was promoted as a unique, world class, multi-role platform aircraft which, In addition to completing traditional maritime roles, also had intelligence gathering capabilities, crucial in today’s troubled world.
The MoD and BAE signed a contract with BAE, in 1996 to build 21 Nimrod spy planes. This was later reduced to 12 and later still to nine.
Then the multi-million pound Nimrod MRA4 surveillance and reconnaissance planes project was scrapped, in the defence review by the Con-Dem government.
Nine of the planes, which were nearing completion were then dismantled for scrap metal. Protesters described the decision as the, “greatest blunder in the history of the UK aircraft industry”
The Nimrod MRA4 development programme had been in place for many years. Around £5bn had been spent and this was written off. Approximately 2000 workers were laid off in consequence of the cancellation.
In an open letter to the Times signed by; (Marshal of the RAF Lord Craig, Major General Julian Thompson, Air Vice-Marshal Tony Mason, Major General Patrick Cordingley, Admiral Sir John “Sandy” Woodward and Air Commodore Andrew Lambert) they warned that scrapping the RAF’s Nimrod surveillance aircraft had left a “massive gap” in UK security.
“Vulnerability of sea lanes, unpredictable overseas crises and traditional surface and submarine opposition will continue to demand versatile responsive aircraft”.
“Nimrod would have continued to provide long-range maritime and overland reconnaissance – including over the UK – anti-submarine surveillance, air-sea rescue coordination, and perhaps most importantly, reconnaissance support to the Navy’s Trident submarines.”
Union leaders also attacked the Government’s controversial decision to scrap the Nimrod spy planes. Unite national officer Bernie Hamilton said: “The lunatics have taken over the asylum when the Government orders the Ministry of Defence to break-up £5bn worth of world-class defence equipment.”
A Ministry of Defence spokesman statement said: “Ministers and service chiefs have made clear that the decision not to bring the Nimrod MRA4 into service was difficult, but it would not be reversed.
An Audit Report later reported there were many other reasons, behind the decision to cancel the project. Those who designed and built the new aircraft couldnt get it to work. It was fit only for scrap. £5 bilion written off. See attached.
https://sites.google.com/site/militaryairworthiness/12-why-was-nimrod-mra4-cancelled
Nearly a decade later in consequence of ruthless financial cuts conventional armed forces, equipment and munitions have been reduced to unacceptably and dangerously low levels. Recruitment has stalled and there is talk of introducing conscription which would require many young people to give up their careers to spend 2 years in the military being paid a wage much lower than their professional colleagues. A novel way for the Government to increase the armed forces at a much reduced cost. Leaves more money in the pot to meet the extortionate bill the US manufacturers will ask the UK Treasury to pay for upgrading the nuclear missiles stock which is much degraded. Is there no end to the incompetence of the many thousands of overpaid Whitehall mandarins who waste many millions of £ funding the purchase of badly designed equipment and munitions.
GROK response below:
https://twitter.com/i/grok/share/pCkX96vYt6VdLyB8q3LlUhhFd
The answer just about covers the subject matter in all respects bu it has overlooked a key consideration, the statement:
” The UK’s nuclear independence is seen as vital for global influence”
The UK is a very small concern who’s influence over the political direction of other countries of the World is much reduced. It retains a place on the UN Security Counsel simply because it possesses the so called independent nuclear deterrent. Without it the UK would need to be at peace with the many other countries of the World. And an aside: The UK nuclear deterrent is only so with a guarantee to continue to provide a comprehensive maintenance service for the missile systems. An isolationist US Government could render the UK’s independent deterrent useless in an instant simply by withdrawing the support which further weakens any argument for its retention.
GROK response below:
https://twitter.com/i/grok/share/RZFlk1IcNJpkHinKsaiu7X092
caltonjock 