Jeremy Corbyn, Labour Party Leader, Says He’d Never Use Nuclear Weapons
|
Version 0 of 1. LONDON — The desire of Jeremy Corbyn, the new leader of the Labour Party, to scrap Britain’s nuclear arsenal is well known, but when he said on Wednesday that he would order the military not to use nuclear weapons if he were prime minister, it created a firestorm of criticism. It was another indication of the difficulties Mr. Corbyn faces as he tries to remain true to his left-wing beliefs and simultaneously earn credibility as a potential future prime minister of Britain, a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. And it underscored sharp divisions within the party itself. Mr. Corbyn, who opposes nuclear weapons as a matter of principle, has said that renewing Britain’s submarine-based nuclear deterrent at the cost, he said, of about 100 billion pounds, or about $151 billion, over the program’s lifetime, is a waste of money. But many in the Labour Party disagree with him, and he was forced to forgo a debate on the renewal of the program, known as Trident, during the party’s convention in Brighton, which ended on Wednesday. Officially, the party remains in favor of the renewal of Trident, and Mr. Corbyn has said he intends to hold a debate among party members at some point to decide whether to stick with it. His aides have hinted that in any parliamentary vote on the renewal, he may allow Labour legislators to vote as they please. But when asked by the BBC if, as prime minister, he would ever authorize the use of nuclear weapons by Britain, he simply said, “No.” “We are not in the era of the Cold War anymore; it finished a long time ago,” Mr. Corbyn said. “I am opposed to the use of nuclear weapons. I am opposed to the holding of nuclear weapons. I want to see a nuclear-free world. I believe it is possible.” It is “immoral” to have or use nuclear weapons, Mr. Corbyn said. “The nuclear weapons that the United States holds, all the hundreds, if not thousands, of warheads they’ve got, were no help to them on 9/11. The issues are threats of irrational acts by individuals.” By speaking so bluntly as a potential prime minister, instead of the fringe member of Parliament he has been for 30 years, Mr. Corbyn raised new questions from members of his own party about whether he would be a good choice to lead one of the most powerful militaries — and one of Washington’s closest allies — in the world. Maria Eagle, Mr. Corbyn’s shadow secretary of defense, called his statement unhelpful, saying that “it undermines to some degree our attempt to try and get a policy process going” in the party, she said. “As far as I’m concerned, we start from the policy we have. I don’t think that a potential prime minister answering a question like that in the way that he did is helpful.” Angela Eagle, her sister and the shadow business secretary, said, “If you’ve got nuclear weapons systems and something awful happens you’ve got to consider being able to use it.” And Andy Burnham, the shadow home secretary and a former candidate for leader of the Labour Party, said that he would “find it difficult” to stay in the shadow cabinet if the party decides to scrap Trident. The ruling Conservatives largely held their fire on Wednesday, at least for the most part, content to let Mr. Corbyn’s colleagues criticize his words. But Michael Fallon, the defense secretary, issued a statement, saying: “The Labour leader is effectively saying he would lower Britain’s defenses. Deterrents don’t work if you’re not prepared to use them. Having nuclear weapons and our enemies knowing that we’re prepared to use them in the most extreme circumstances of self-defense is vital to keeping our country safe.” Later in the day, Mr. Corbyn told ITN that if the party decided to keep the nuclear deterrent, he would have to “live with it, somehow.” But that is different from being willing to use it. Even union leaders were uncomfortable. Paul Kenny, the leader of the large GMB trade union, said that Mr. Corbyn would have to accept the party policy or resign. Asked if Mr. Corbyn could be prime minister if the party wanted to keep nuclear weapons that he would never use, Mr. Kenny said: “Then he’s got a choice to make in terms of whether he followed the defense policy of the country, or felt that he should resign. His integrity would drive his decision one way or another.” Mr. Corbyn also indicated that he would be unlikely to support Prime Minister David Cameron’s call for Britain, like France, to bomb Islamic State targets in Syria as well as in Iraq. Mr. Cameron has said he will first seek parliamentary approval, but Mr. Corbyn’s election has called that into question. On Wednesday, Mr. Corbyn said, “I do not see any circumstances at the moment where bombing is actually going to make any great difference.” He said that, “the dangers are huge, the dangers of mission creep are enormous,” with the potential danger “of dragging British forces in on the ground.” He said he would need to think the question over very carefully, but again his aides hinted that in the new mode of accepting differing points of view, Mr. Corbyn might allow Labour legislators to vote with their conscience on bombing Syria. |