New British nuclear sub fleet proposed

Blair seeks protection from states, terrorists

December 05, 2006|By Kim Murphy | Kim Murphy,Los Angeles Times

LONDON -- British Prime Minister Tony Blair called yesterday for building a multibillion-dollar, new-generation nuclear submarine fleet to counter future threats from rogue nuclear states and nuclear terrorism.

The move, which Blair justified as a hedge against potential threats from terrorists and states with nuclear ambitions, such as Iran and North Korea, rekindled debate over Britain's nuclear future and the role of such weapons in the post-Cold-War world.

Blair said his government will support a top-to-bottom renewal of the nation's nuclear-powered submarine fleet, which is equipped with nuclear Trident ballistic missiles, to assure Britain's seat among the world's five major nuclear powers for decades into the future.

"The risk of giving up something that has been one of the mainstays of our security since the [Second World] War, and moreover doing so when the one certain thing about our world today is its uncertainty, is not a risk I feel we can responsibly take. Our independent nuclear deterrent is the ultimate insurance," Blair told an occasionally skeptical parliament, which will vote on the program in March.

"Proliferation remains a real problem," he said. "The notion of unstable, usually deeply repressive and anti-democratic states, in some cases profoundly inimical to our way of life, having a nuclear capability, is a distinct and novel reason for Britain not to give up its capacity to deter."

There have been mounting calls in Britain to dismantle the four-boat nuclear-weapons fleet that many believe has outlived its purpose. Spending billions on a new fleet could undermine negotiations with North Korea and Iran at a time when those nations are being asked to adhere to international nonproliferation obligations, they say.

"How can this cost be justified in the post-Cold War environment, when it will severely restrict much more needed conventional military expenditures, undermine the non-proliferation treaty and drain of colossal sums of money from real threats of terrorism, climate change and long-term energy security?" Michael Meacher, a deputy from Blair's own Labor Party, argued during yesterday's opening debate in the House of Commons.

But Blair's proposal can survive misgivings in his own camp because he is assured of substantial support among opposition Conservative lawmakers. Tory leader David Cameron said "the case is very powerful" for building "a credible system that isn't vulnerable to preemptive attack," and even questioned Blair's commitment to a 20 percent reduction in the number of Trident nuclear warheads.

"Does he realize he doesn't have to make concessions to those who've never supported the concept of deterrence?" Cameron said.

Blair is calling for revamping U.S.-made Trident D5 missiles to extend their utility into the early 2040s while reducing their number from 200 to 160. British designers would immediately launch the design and construction of as many as four new submarines to replace within 17 years the current fleet of four Vanguard-class nuclear-powered submarines, launched in the mid-1990s.

The estimated cost would range from $30 billion to $40 billion, an average of 3 percent of the defense budget over the next two decades.

Britain would continue to field the smallest stockpile of nuclear weapons among the five recognized nuclear powers and would be the only one with a single delivery system, Blair pointed out.

Kim Murphy writes for the Los Angeles Times.

Baltimore Sun Articles
|
|
|
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.