The UK’s possession of nuclear weapons is often justified in terms of uncertainty about the future. However, developments at home and abroad may one day make the UK’s Trident weapons system politically (and legally) impossible.
Despite perceptions of a new Cold War, the US and Russia continue to respect the provisions of the New START treaty.
There have been some interesting stories about Trident in the press of late. Here are just a few of them.
Drones, or ‘remotely piloted air systems’ in RAF speak, are now familiar. However in 2013 a public debate started over what many consider the next phase in drone warfare: lethal autonomous robots.
Last month, the independent think-tank BASIC made an interesting contribution to the debate on Trident replacement. They released a report, Trident in UK Politics and Public Opinion, summarising the top-line results from every national survey about British nukes in recenttest
In a recent op-ed, four US elder statesmen called for a re-think of traditional ideas on nuclear deterrence. The group, led by former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, warned that the horizontal proliferation of nuclear technology had undermined the doctrine of ‘mutual assured destruction’.
During a surprise visit to Afghanistan this week, the prime minister announced the UK will double its military unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) capability by 2013.
President Obama is facing a challenge to pass START after leading Republicans have called for a delay on the vote to ratify the treaty. The deal with Russia regarding nuclear weapons inspections is a key foreign policy initiative for Obama.
Following the terror alert at the weekend, there is widespread speculation President Obama will order more drone strikes on Yemen to tackle the threat posed by al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP). Such a strategy, however, may cause more problems and result in an even greater threat.
Andrew Gibson asks whether, as the defence industry pumps more funds into robotics, we can ever legitimately use unmanned armed robots.
