The United Kingdom’s nuclear weapons arsenal is crucially dependent on U.S. actions, as a key bilateral agreement is up for renewal, reports the London Guardian.
At issue is the so-called Mutual Defense Agreement, first signed in 1958. Work on the latest extension of the pact was ongoing on both sides of the Atlantic as of earlier this year, according to the newspaper’s Defence and Security Blog. The agreement is key because it enables the British military to take advantage of nuclear-weapons work conducted in the United States, including the sharing of data, test results and the use of U.S. test facilities.
British politicians have previously assured the public that the country’s stockpile of Trident warheads is reliable for another two decades or so. However, the blog quotes a Royal United Services Institute report concluding that “a limited understanding of warhead aging” makes precise estimates difficult.
In essence, the U.K. arsenal “will depend more upon external rather than internal factors,” the London-based think tank’s analysis concludes.
“Chief amongst these external factors will be the U.S. warhead program, which provides many key components of the U.K. arsenal,” according to the think tank.
In other words, how the U.S. nuclear complex proceeds in maintaining and modernizing Washington’s arsenal could affect the U.K. deterrent force.
“The U.K. may have no more luck predicting the future of the U.S. program than it does the reliability of its own arsenal,” the think tank report reads. “The U.S. program is currently in flux, and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future.”
Replacing the warheads would take roughly 17 years and cost the equivalent of approximately $6.65 billion at today’s prices, according to the Guardian article. Britain plans to reduce its stockpile of 225 Trident warheads to 180 or less, with up to 120 operationally available for the country’s Vanguard submarine fleet, the blog quotes a 2010 Strategic Defence and Security Review as saying.
What We're Following See More »
"Even if House Republicans manage to get enough members of their party on board with the latest version of their health care bill, they will face another battle in the Senate: whether the bill complies with the chamber’s arcane ... Byrd rule, which stipulates all provisions in a reconciliation bill must affect federal spending and revenues in a way that is not merely incidental." Democrats should have the advantage in that fight, "unless the Senate pulls another 'nuclear option.'”
The House has passed a one-week spending bill that will avert a government shutdown which was set to begin at midnight. Lawmakers now have an extra week to come to a longer agreement which is expected to fund the government through the end of the fiscal year in September. The legislation now goes to the Senate, where it is expected to pass before President Trump signs it.
President Trump’s portrayal of an effort to funnel more Medicaid dollars to Puerto Rico as a "bailout" is complicating negotiations over a continuing resolution on the budget. "House Democrats are now requiring such assistance as a condition for supporting the continuing resolution," a position that the GOP leadership is amenable to. "But Mr. Trump’s apparent skepticism aligns him with conservative House Republicans inclined to view its request as a bailout, leaving the deal a narrow path to passage in Congress."
Democrats in the House are threatening to shut down the government if Republicans expedite a vote on a bill to repeal and replace Obamacare, said Democratic House Whip Steny Hoyer Thursday. Lawmakers have introduced a one-week spending bill to give themselves an extra week to reach a long-term funding deal, which seemed poised to pass easily. However, the White House is pressuring House Republicans to take a vote on their Obamacare replacement Friday to give Trump a legislative victory, though it is still not clear that they have the necessary votes to pass the health care bill. This could go down to the wire.