Nato Trident and Scottish Independence

7/31/2019 Nato Trident and Scottish Independence

1/48

NATO, Trident &Scottish Independence

Presentation toSNP CND conference

STUC Glasgow25 August 2012

John Ainslie, Coordinator, Scottish CND


2/48

NATO, Trident &Scottish Independence

1. Trident: Nowhere to go

2. Disarming Trident

3. NATO & nuclear weapons


3/48

1. Trident: Nowhere to go


4/48

Move Trident to England/Wales ?

1. Base for submarines to replaceFaslane

2. Depot for missiles and nuclear

warheads to replace Coulport

New Facilities needed -


5/48

Polaris Site Selection 1963

All sites on Eastand South coastsfrom the Firth of

Forth to Portlandruled out

too far from deep

water(100 fathoms)


6/48

Shortlist

Scotland:

Faslane, Rosyth, Invergordon, Loch Alsh,Loch Ryan and Fort William.

Wales:

Milford Haven

England:Devonport, Falmouth and Portland



7/48


Portland

Milford Haven

DevonportFalmouth

Options inEngland& Wales


8/48

Move Trident to England/Wales ?

Trident needs far morespace than the MOD

assumed was neededfor Polaris in 1963.

Coulport was expandedto three times its originalsize to accommodateTrident

Coulport Trident nuclear depot


9/48

Move Trident to Milford Haven ?

Five major oil and gas facilitieswould have to close.

These handle 30% of the UKs

gas and 25% of the UKs oil


10/48

Move Trident to Portland ?

Former MOD site

used for OlympicsNo site for Coulport


11/48

Move Trident to Devonport ?


12/48

Move Trident to Devonport ?

Risk assessment forFaslane shiplift shows anaccident can lead to

explosion of 560 tonnesTNT equivalent anddispersal of 160 kgplutonium.

This would beunacceptable in a city of

250,000.


13/48

Move Trident to Falmouth ?


14/48

Move Trident to Falmouth ?

Nuclear depot

Too close to FalmouthLoss of 2 villagesLand purchase complexLoss of watersports

industry


15/48

Is any greenfield site viable ?

New Nuclear Power StationsOnly existing sites seriously

Scrapped submarinesOnly options Rosyth or Devonport

MOD 1979Greenfield site an illusion Frank Cooper


16/48

Move Trident to Barrow ?

Walney Channelis too shallow

for Tridentsubmarines

HMS Repulse ran aground when launched


17/48

Move UK Trident to the USA ?

Considered in 1981 and ruled out.

UK would need to keep control of

weapons at all times to comply

with NPT and so would need

separate facilities.

UK Trident would be transparently

dependent on US.

Would need consent of Congress.

US Navy Trident base

Kings Bay, Georgia, USA


18/48

Move UK Trident to France ?

Ile Longue is toosmall for Trident

safety zones

UK would need to

build a new facilityElsewhere in France.

UK Trident would

depend on Franceand US.


19/48

Where can Trident go ?

BarrowMilford Haven

PortlandDevonport

FalmouthDevonport-Falmouth

USA

France

NOWHERE !


20/48

Nowhere to Go

No Trident in Scotland

meansNo nuclear weapons in the UK


21/48

Nowhere to Go

No Trident in Scotland

meansNo nuclear weapons in the UK

Implications:

1. Pro-nuclear lobby will oppose & delay

2. Scotland could have a major impact onglobal nuclear disarmament


22/48

2. Disarming Trident


23/48

Disarming Trident

Phase 1

End operational deployment of submarines

Time to complete from Day 1 7 days


24/48


25/48

Disarming Trident

Phase 3

Deactivate missiles

Time to complete from Day 1 8 days


26/48

Disarming Trident

Phase 4

Remove nuclear warheads from submarines

Time to complete from Day 1 8 weeks


27/48

Disarming Trident

Phase 5

Remove missiles from two submarines

Time to complete from Day 1 10 weeks


28/48

Disarming Trident

Phase 6

Disable nuclear warheads by removing parts

Time to complete from Day 1 1 year


29/48

Disarming Trident

Phase 7

Remove nuclear warheads from Scotland

Time to complete from Day 1 2 years


30/48

Disarming Trident

Phase 8

Dismantle nuclear warheads at Burghfield

Time to complete from Day 1 4 years


31/48

Disarming Trident


32/48

Disarming Trident

Bruce Blair: The report accurately

describes the essential steps ... If anythingthe timetable is conservative

Richard Garwin: The missiles

and nuclear weapons can bedisabled within weeks and

removed within two years anddismantled within four years if

that were judged to be desirable

Scottish Government: The suggestedtimetable is a welcome indication of howquickly Trident could be removed


33/48

3. NATO & nuclear weapons


34/48

NATO an unequal alliance

United States$700 billion

27 otherNATO members

$300 billion

DefenceSpending2011


35/48

Nuclear Weapons in NATO

Countries withtheir ownnuclear weapons

UK

US

France


36/48

Nuclear Weapons in NATO

Countries withtheir ownnuclear weapons

Countries hostingAmericannuclear weapons

UK

US

France

Germany

Italy

Belgium

Netherlands

Turkey


37/48

US nuclear weapons in Europe

American B 61nuclear bombscan be carried

by aircraft of thehost nation.

B 61 being fitted on a GermanAir Force Tornado


38/48

US nuclear weapons in Europe

Country Number of nuclear weapons

For use by

host Air Force

For use by

US Air Force

Total

Germany 10-20 10-20

Italy 10-20 50 60-70

Belgium 10-20 10-20

Netherlands 10-20 10-20

Turkey 10-20 50 60-70

Total 50-100 100 160-200


39/48

Belgian attitude to US B61s

Since 2005, successiveparliaments have called

on their government totake action, within NATO,to have nuclear weaponsremoved.


40/48

Dutch attitude to US B61s

Parliament motionApril 2010:

Inform the US

government that it

regards the withdrawal of

these nuclear weapons

as desirable.


41/48

German attitude to US B61s

Foreign Minister GuidoWesterwelle called on NATO towithdraw nuclear weapons(Bundestag Nov 2010)

Removal of the weapons is partof the Coalition Agreement ofthe Government


42/48

NATOs Groundhog Day

2010

Germany, Belgium & Netherlandscall for NATO to review its nuclearweapons policy

Nov2010 Lisbon Summit sets up a review

2012 Quad of 4 countries, 3 of them nuclearweapons states (US, UK & France)draft the final text

May2012

Chicago summit agrees no change toNATOs nuclear policy

http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/05/nucleargroundhog.php

S
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/05/nucleargroundhog.phphttp://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/05/nucleargroundhog.php


43/48

US plan to modernise the B61

The US are planning to spend$11 billion upgrading B61.

The new B 61-12 would be a

precision guided weapon.

It would be based in Europe aswell as the USA.

NATO effectively endorsed thisat the May 2012 Chicagosummit.

The B 61-12 is so expensiveit has been called the

gold-plated nuclear bomb.

http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/07/b61-12gold.php

Th l f N
http://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/07/b61-12gold.phphttp://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/07/b61-12gold.phphttp://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/07/b61-12gold.phphttp://www.fas.org/blog/ssp/2012/07/b61-12gold.php


44/48

The example of Norway

Norway doesnt allow nuclear

weapons on its soil.

Norway promotes nuclear

disarmament at NPTconferences.

Norway supports NATO and

is cautious about criticisingNATOs nuclear policy.

a

a

x

NATO d di


45/48

NATO and disarmament

NATO is a roadblock tonuclear disarmament.

It has discouraged

European countriesfrom telling the US towithdraw its nuclearweapons.

S i NATO TRIDENT


46/48

Scenario 1: NATO yes TRIDENT no

Independent Scotland says to NATOWe want to be in NATO, but Trident must go.

The US and RUK want to keep Trident at Faslane.So NATO keeps Scotland waiting and says

This is a difficult issue ... We need to reach a consensus ...

We dont want to upset the cohesion of the alliance

As the years go by, Scotland is woven into the fabric ofNATO and removing Trident becomes more difficult.

S i 2 NATO TRIDENT


47/48

Scenario 2: NATO no TRIDENT no

Independent Scotland saysno to Trident and NATO

US and RUK want to keep

Trident

but they realise the gameis up and Scotland wont

budge.

Trident is removed ASP.

Nuclear weapon convoy

heading South

S


48/48

Summary

There is nowhere for Trident to go

If Westminster, the US and NATO think that Scotlandmight negotiate and allow Trident, then they will stalland delay

Staying outside NATO is a clear sign that there is noscope for negotiating a lease agreement for Trident

An independent Scotland could insist that Trident isdisabled within one week and that all nuclearweapons are removed within two years.

Documents

Nato Trident and Scottish Independence