Key U.K. Tories Said to Want Nuclear Arms Based in U.S., If Scots Expel Them

Global Security Newswire Staff
Add to Briefcase
Global Security Newswire Staff
April 21, 2014, 8:05 a.m.

Some U.K. Con­ser­vat­ive Party lead­ers are said to sup­port tem­por­ar­ily basing Brit­ish nuc­le­ar arms in the United States if they are ex­pelled from Scot­land.

The Tory-led co­ali­tion gov­ern­ment in Lon­don is fiercely op­posed to a cam­paign sponsored by Scot­tish na­tion­al­ists to se­cede from the United King­dom. If voters choose in­de­pend­ence in a Septem­ber ref­er­en­dum, the loc­ally gov­ern­ing Scot­tish Na­tion­al Party has vowed to quickly be­gin re­mov­ing from Scot­land all nuc­le­ar-armed Tri­dent D-5 mis­siles — and ul­ti­mately the sub­mar­ines that carry them — by 2020.

Lon­don has not of­fi­cially ac­know­ledged any con­tin­gency scen­ari­os for a pos­sible fu­ture in which the nuc­le­ar-armed fleet of four Van­guard-class ves­sels is ordered out of an in­de­pend­ent Scot­land.

Privately, however, some seni­or Con­ser­vat­ive mem­bers think the sub­mar­ines and weapons could be tem­por­ar­ily sent to the United States, the Glas­gow Her­ald re­por­ted on Sat­urday. The two al­lies have a long­stand­ing co­oper­a­tion agree­ment re­lated to equip­ping and main­tain­ing the U.K. sub­mar­ines with the Tri­dent mis­siles.

“Tri­dent could go to Amer­ica if Scot­land votes for in­de­pend­ence,” an an­onym­ous Con­ser­vat­ive source told the news­pa­per. “It would not be ideal for the U.K.’s nuc­le­ar de­terrent to be based out­side the U.K. But it would be a per­fectly doable solu­tion in the short term, as a ‘stop gap’ meas­ure.”

Un­der such a scen­ario, the fleet would be re­turned to the United King­dom as a home base once new fa­cil­it­ies have been con­struc­ted to re­place the lost sites in Scot­land.

A 2012 re­port by a Brit­ish par­lia­ment­ary pan­el re­com­men­ded the gov­ern­ment weigh tem­por­ar­ily re­lo­cat­ing some Van­guard sub­mar­ines to the U.S. Nav­al Sub­mar­ine Base Kings Bay in south­east Geor­gia; navy fa­cil­it­ies in France were also sug­ges­ted as a po­ten­tial host­ing solu­tion.

Mean­while, a new Brit­ish De­fence Min­istry re­port has dis­closed that there were more than 260 atom­ic-safety in­cid­ents at its nuc­le­ar fa­cil­it­ies in Scot­land in the last half-dec­ade, RIA Nov­osti re­por­ted on Monday.

The min­istry said hu­man er­ror was re­spons­ible for 75 per­cent of the in­cid­ents, which in­cluded “false alarms and sys­tem fail­ures” for com­puters that over­see war­heads.

What We're Following See More »
Chicago Tribune Endorses Gary Johnson
27 minutes ago

No matter that his recall of foreign leaders leaves something to be desired, Gary Johnson is the choice of the Chicago Tribune's editorial board. The editors argue that Donald Trump couldn't do the job of president, while hitting Hillary Clinton for "her intent to greatly increase federal spending and taxation, and serious questions about honesty and trust." Which leaves them with Johnson. "Every American who casts a vote for him is standing for principles," they write, "and can be proud of that vote. Yes, proud of a candidate in 2016."

Obama Compares Peres to ‘Giants of the 20th Century’
46 minutes ago

Speaking at the funeral of former Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, President Obama "compared Peres to 'other giants of the 20th century' such as Nelson Mandela and Queen Elizabeth who 'find no need to posture or traffic in what's popular in the moment.'" Among the 6,000 mourners at the service was Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Obama called Abbas's presence a sign of the "unfinished business of peace" in the region.

How Many New Voters Does the Clinton Campaign Aim to Register?
53 minutes ago

Three million—a number that lays "bare the significant gap between Donald Trump’s bare-bones operation and the field program that Clinton and her hundreds of aides have been building for some 17 months."

Chicago Tribune Endorses Johnson
1 hours ago

In a somewhat shocking move, the Chicago Tribune has endorsed Libertarian candidate Gary Johnson for president, saying a vote for him is one that voters "can be proud of." The editorial barely touches on Donald Trump, who the paper has time and again called "unfit to be president," before offering a variety of reasons for why it can't endorse Hillary Clinton. Johnson has been in the news this week for being unable to name a single world leader who he admires, after earlier this month being unable to identify "Aleppo," a major Syrian city in the middle of the country's ongoing war.

USA Today Weighs in on Presidential Race for First Time Ever
14 hours ago

"By all means vote, just not for Donald Trump." That's the message from USA Today editors, who are making the first recommendation on a presidential race in the paper's 34-year history. It's not exactly an endorsement; they make clear that the editorial board "does not have a consensus for a Clinton endorsement." But they state flatly that Donald Trump is, by "unanimous consensus of the editorial board, unfit for the presidency."