This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk-news/2013/jul/16/ending-cold-war-nuclear-subs-save

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Ending 'cold war' nuclear sub patrols would save money, Lib Dems say Ending 'cold war' nuclear sub patrols would save money, Lib Dems say
(2 months later)
Britain should "step down the nuclear ladder" and save money by ending its cold war posture of round-the-clock patrols by a nuclear-armed submarine, the Liberal Democrat leadership said on Tuesday – clashing with its Conservative coalition partners as Whitehall released its review on alternatives to Trident.Britain should "step down the nuclear ladder" and save money by ending its cold war posture of round-the-clock patrols by a nuclear-armed submarine, the Liberal Democrat leadership said on Tuesday – clashing with its Conservative coalition partners as Whitehall released its review on alternatives to Trident.
Danny Alexander, the Treasury chief secretary, who oversaw the long-awaited review on behalf of the Lib Dems, described it as the "most comprehensive study ever published" by a British government on the country's nuclear weapons posture. Britain should "step down the nuclear ladder" he said, describing Trident as the "last unreformed bastion of cold war thinking".Danny Alexander, the Treasury chief secretary, who oversaw the long-awaited review on behalf of the Lib Dems, described it as the "most comprehensive study ever published" by a British government on the country's nuclear weapons posture. Britain should "step down the nuclear ladder" he said, describing Trident as the "last unreformed bastion of cold war thinking".
Nick Clegg said he hoped the report would open a "fact-based debate" on Trident, prior to the big decisions on the submarine replacement programme due to be taken in 2016, after the general election. "It clearly shows that there are options for our country that do not simply involve us sticking to the same strategic positions that were taken in the cold war," he said.Nick Clegg said he hoped the report would open a "fact-based debate" on Trident, prior to the big decisions on the submarine replacement programme due to be taken in 2016, after the general election. "It clearly shows that there are options for our country that do not simply involve us sticking to the same strategic positions that were taken in the cold war," he said.
The review, demanded by the Lib Dems as part of the 2010 coalition agreement and drawn up by senior Cabinet Office officials, says "the fundamental and enduring premise is that the UK deterrent will remain a political tool of last resort rather than a war-fighting capability".The review, demanded by the Lib Dems as part of the 2010 coalition agreement and drawn up by senior Cabinet Office officials, says "the fundamental and enduring premise is that the UK deterrent will remain a political tool of last resort rather than a war-fighting capability".
It concludes that while alternatives to Trident would enable the UK to be capable of inflicting "significant damage such that most potential adversaries around the world would be deterred", none offered "the same degree of resilience as the current posture of continuous at-sea deterrence [CASD], nor could they guarantee a prompt response in all circumstances".It concludes that while alternatives to Trident would enable the UK to be capable of inflicting "significant damage such that most potential adversaries around the world would be deterred", none offered "the same degree of resilience as the current posture of continuous at-sea deterrence [CASD], nor could they guarantee a prompt response in all circumstances".
Alexander said on Tuesday that if a new Trident fleet consisted of three rather than four submarines – a reduction that would not guarantee CASD – then £4bn would be saved over a lifetime of 30 years. That is a small proportion of the estimated cost of £20bn-£25bn of building four Trident submarines, plus a sum at least double that to maintain them. The review did not consider halving the size of a new Trident fleet to just two.Alexander said on Tuesday that if a new Trident fleet consisted of three rather than four submarines – a reduction that would not guarantee CASD – then £4bn would be saved over a lifetime of 30 years. That is a small proportion of the estimated cost of £20bn-£25bn of building four Trident submarines, plus a sum at least double that to maintain them. The review did not consider halving the size of a new Trident fleet to just two.
The review said placing nuclear warheads on missiles based on land, or on bombs carried by aircraft, would be ineffective as deterrents and expensive.The review said placing nuclear warheads on missiles based on land, or on bombs carried by aircraft, would be ineffective as deterrents and expensive.
It said placing nuclear warheads on cruise missiles carried by submarines – an alternative once suggested by the Lib Dems – would cost an extra £10bn and would take 24 years.It said placing nuclear warheads on cruise missiles carried by submarines – an alternative once suggested by the Lib Dems – would cost an extra £10bn and would take 24 years.
The debate will centre on whether Britain still needs a CASD posture. The review lists four alternatives: focused deterrence, whereby a Trident submarine would be deployed for a specific period against a specific adversary; sustained deterrence, whereby patrols would be regular but not necessarily at high readiness; responsive deterrence, where there would be gaps between patrols; and preserved deterrence, with nuclear weapons on low readiness.The debate will centre on whether Britain still needs a CASD posture. The review lists four alternatives: focused deterrence, whereby a Trident submarine would be deployed for a specific period against a specific adversary; sustained deterrence, whereby patrols would be regular but not necessarily at high readiness; responsive deterrence, where there would be gaps between patrols; and preserved deterrence, with nuclear weapons on low readiness.
Many in the Labour party want Britain to abandon a CASD posture, which they say is no longer necessary. However, the shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, seized on the cautious nature of the review, saying it offered no evidence to challenge Labour's view that a "minimum credible independent nuclear deterrent" was best delivered through CASD.Many in the Labour party want Britain to abandon a CASD posture, which they say is no longer necessary. However, the shadow defence secretary, Jim Murphy, seized on the cautious nature of the review, saying it offered no evidence to challenge Labour's view that a "minimum credible independent nuclear deterrent" was best delivered through CASD.
Murphy added: "Labour would keep momentum on our disarmament efforts, looking at further reduction of missiles and warheads on deployed vessels, as well as taking a lead internationally to push the agenda of global anti-proliferation."Murphy added: "Labour would keep momentum on our disarmament efforts, looking at further reduction of missiles and warheads on deployed vessels, as well as taking a lead internationally to push the agenda of global anti-proliferation."
The defence secretary, Philip Hammond, repeated his attack on those questioning the need for CASD: "We can have continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrence or we can have a part-time deterrent."The defence secretary, Philip Hammond, repeated his attack on those questioning the need for CASD: "We can have continuous-at-sea nuclear deterrence or we can have a part-time deterrent."
The SNP leader at Westminster, Angus Robertson, dismissed the exercise for different reasons. "Any review that doesn't consider getting rid of these weapons of mass destruction is a joke," he said. "The Westminster establishment seem to have forgotten that Trident is based in Scotland, and neither the people nor parliament of Scotland want it here."The SNP leader at Westminster, Angus Robertson, dismissed the exercise for different reasons. "Any review that doesn't consider getting rid of these weapons of mass destruction is a joke," he said. "The Westminster establishment seem to have forgotten that Trident is based in Scotland, and neither the people nor parliament of Scotland want it here."
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament released its own report, entitled The Real Alternative: what the government's Trident alternatives review isn't telling you. Not replacing Trident was "a credible option, which offers serious strategic and economic benefits", argued CND, saying that more than £100bn could be saved over the lifetime of a Trident successor system.The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament released its own report, entitled The Real Alternative: what the government's Trident alternatives review isn't telling you. Not replacing Trident was "a credible option, which offers serious strategic and economic benefits", argued CND, saying that more than £100bn could be saved over the lifetime of a Trident successor system.
Louise Edge, disarmament campaigner for Greenpeace UK, said: "£100bn could do a lot to address some of the real threats facing modern Britain – climate change, the recession, terrorism – but instead we're throwing it away on a system designed for the threat of Soviet tanks entering West Germany."Louise Edge, disarmament campaigner for Greenpeace UK, said: "£100bn could do a lot to address some of the real threats facing modern Britain – climate change, the recession, terrorism – but instead we're throwing it away on a system designed for the threat of Soviet tanks entering West Germany."
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. Enter your email address to subscribe.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox every weekday.