Upwardly
Mobile.
The 60th anniversary of the
dropping of the atom bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki approaches, so it seems timely to review progress towards a
nuclear-free world. The review of the
Non-Proliferation Treaty in New
York in May underlined an
unsatisfactory status quo – it seems that contrary to NPT articles, the nuclear
weapons states have every intention of keeping their existing arsenals, and are
even working actively to diversify and improve their nuclear ‘capability’. At the 2000 Review
Conference the UK, along with the
other declared nuclear weapon states, gave an “unequivocal undertaking to
accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals.” Nothing has come
of this promise.
In Britain
there will be a discussion in the next parliamentary session as to whether we
should get rid of Trident, or start work on a successor, Trident being regarded
as approaching its sell-by date (an extraordinary idea in itself! – will the
successor flatten cities even flatter?).
Unfortunately there are strong grounds for thinking that the debate will
be a sham, and that a decision has already been taken to go ahead with a
new-improved version. The £2 billion of
taxpayers’ money allocated for new facilities at Aldermaston cannot be required
for any other purpose than vertical proliferation. In addition, an expensive refit of Trident
submarines is currently proposed. In the
words of CND chair Kate Hudson:
“This
refit programme is a threat to the environment and a threat to the health and
safety of the people of Plymouth. Trident is an illegal and immoral nuclear weapon of
mass destruction and must be scrapped. Our government is committed under the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty to getting rid of its nuclear weapons. Instead, it is
refitting the Trident nuclear weapons submarines and planning to replace the
system when its service life comes to an end.
This
year is the 60th anniversary of the nuclear bombs being dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. We must abolish these immoral and illegal weapons
now. The refit must be brought to an end; scrap Trident, don’t replace it.”
Meanwhile, in the USA, the problem of
vertical proliferation is even worse than in Britain. At least here the pusillanimous argument is
trotted out by the MoD that ‘we’ nice Brits want to get rid of our nuclear
weapons, of course, but we have to wait till the others get rid of theirs. This
at least implies an admission that nuclear weapons are a danger to
mankind. In the US this idea is
rejected outright by policymakers.
There, Star War technology, new types of nuclear weapons, and the
weaponisation of space are being actively pursued with no backward glace at the
dangers.
The Nuclear Posture Review, a classified document delivered to Congress
on 8th January 2002, was summarized by
William Arkin in The Los Angeles Times
on March 10th 2002. In it the term ‘New Triad’ was coined to
describe the three sectors of ‘nuclear capability’ needed for the
post-September 11 world. The first is
the ‘offensive strike leg’ (the nuclear and conventional forces), the second is
the ‘active and passive defences’ (includes anti-missile missiles and Star Wars),
and the third is described as ‘our responsive defence infrastructure’ (the
ability to develop and produce nuclear weapons and resume nuclear
testing). The review calls for new
weapons systems, and for the incorporation of ‘nuclear capability’ into many
conventional systems. Cruise missiles should
be ‘modified to carry nuclear warheads if necessary’, and the new F-35 Joint
Strike Fighter should be modified to carry nuclear weapons ‘at an affordable
price’.
It must have been hard for US negotiators at the Non Proliferation
Treaty, at which they were supposed to work ‘in good faith’ towards eliminating
their nuclear weapons, to keep a straight face!
H.D.