Tory leadership hopeful Theresa May tells us “it would be sheer madness to contemplate even for a moment giving up Britain's independent nuclear deterrent.” Of course this makes for a good stump speech and will help the votes roll in. But from a potential prime minister we want more up to date thinking than that.
The decision to buy Trident was made in the 1980s. Whether to replace it has to be judged by what we need today. It would be sheer irresponsibility not to contemplate giving up Trident. We need a twenty first century approach to our security needs. Is there any sector where we just unthinkingly carry on with the same old policy?
In fact, Mrs May’s own government has twice concluded in its National Security Strategies that the main threats we face come from terrorism, climate change, pandemics and cyber warfare. It would be sheer folly to spend £205 billion on a weapons system that does nothing to address these threats and actually puts us at greater risk by making us a target. It would surely be wise to contemplate – even for a moment – spending that money on more useful things.
Let’s spend a moment contemplating the technological viability of Trident, as we hear from experts that the submarine systems will be vulnerable to cyber attack, that they could be rendered obsolete. And what about the threat of underwater drones? The submarines will no longer be undetectable under the waves. The vast amounts of money being poured into drone technology means that eventually Trident will be both detectable and targetable. It would be sheer profligacy to waste British tax payers’ money on a system with built-in redundancy.
Whoever becomes our next prime minister, I hope they will carefully scrutinise the case for and against Trident. Those precious moments contemplating this crucial issue would be well spent, for to replace Trident would be sheer madness.