An Analysis of Pro-Nuclear Deterrent Politician's Silence on Trident and Practical Alternatives

The current debate among British politicians regarding nuclear deterrence has been largely focused on maintaining the existing submarine-launched Trident system. Notably, the idea of a more practical system that involves removing all nuclear weapons while keeping submarines at sea has not been widely proposed. This article examines the reasons behind the lack of practical alternatives and explores potential alternatives such as submarine-launched nuclear cruise missiles and French nuclear submarines.

Why Pro-Nuclear Deterrent Politicians Prefer Trident

One of the main reasons for the reluctance of British politicians to propose practical alternatives to Trident is the traditional approach to nuclear deterrence. Historically, Britain has relied on submarine-launched nuclear weapons as a cornerstone of its strategic nuclear deterrent. This has been justified on several grounds:

Economic Benefits

British politicians often argue that the maintenance of the Trident system supports jobs and stimulates the economy. Submarine manufacturing and repair industries are significant contributors to employment in certain regions, making them politically relevant and crucial for job creation.

Macho Image and National Pride

Submarines represent a powerful and sophisticated technological achievement, which resonates strongly with the machismo and national pride of many in British politics. The belief that a country should possess such formidable capabilities is deeply ingrained in the psyche of many politicians.

Realistic Deterrent Effectiveness

Submarines offer a strategic advantage due to their ability to remain undetected and launch nuclear missiles with significant precision. This inherent invulnerability to a first strike ensures mutual assured destruction (MAD), which is seen as a necessary condition for deterrence.

Exploring Alternative Nuclear Deterrent Options

While the current system has its merits, there are several alternative options that could provide a practical and effective nuclear deterrent without the traditional costs and risks:

Submarine-Launched Nuclear Cruise Missiles

The United States has already been using submarine-launched nuclear cruise missiles (SSGNs) on its hunter-killer submarines. This approach could potentially offer a lower-cost alternative to the Trident system, as these submarines could be re-purposed. By reducing the reliance on dedicated nuclear subs, the military could deploy more submarines in various strategic roles.

The advantages of submarine-launched nuclear cruise missiles include their ability to remain undetected and their versatility in complex maritime environments. They offer a reduced risk compared to the development of a completely new nuclear system, as they can leverage existing submarine infrastructure and capabilities.

French Nuclear Submarines

Another potential solution is to purchase proven French nuclear submarines. These submarines are significantly cheaper than the Trident system, and the existing nuclear infrastructure could be used to launch and manage these submarines. This approach would not only save costs but also reduce the overall risk and complexity of the nuclear deterrent system.

Conclusions

The current debate about Britain's nuclear deterrence strategy has highlighted the challenges and limitations of the Trident system. While traditional arguments favor the continuation of this system, exploring alternative options such as submarine-launched nuclear cruise missiles and French nuclear submarines could provide a more practical and cost-effective solution. The future of nuclear deterrence will likely involve a balance between maintaining traditional capabilities and embracing innovative and sustainable alternatives.