|
Have you ever been close to a nuclear weapons arsenal? You probably weren’t aware of it, but if you live near Glasgow, then you are living only 20-odd miles from the biggest stockpile of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Europe. Vast numbers of these horrific weapons are stored at Coulport, Faslane and Glen Douglas in the hills between Helensburgh and Balloch. They are well hidden from view, but they represent Britain’s “nuclear deterrent”. So whom are we deterring nowadays? Certainly not Al Qaeda!
Discussion of Britain’s nuclear weapons is less fashionable now than it was in the 70s and 80s, despite the fact that in those days the Communist threat actually gave some justification for maintaining WMDs. But the question is going to arise again very soon since today’s Trident weapons are considered to be approaching obsolescence. The Westminster government will, of course, try to keep this topic out of the media until next year’s elections are past.
The replacement for Trident with a new system (inevitably even more fiendish than the old one) is very much in line with the warlike tendencies of the New Labour Government in London. Its cost will be immense, some predict in the region of £50billion over the life of the system.
Quite apart from the appalling consequences on the target nation if such weapons were ever actually used, there is also the dreadful possibility of an accident during transport, storage or deployment of these systems. This is where it’s sobering to remember that they are stored in the West of Scotland, so close to Glasgow and its suburbs. Nowadays, of course, a greater threat comes from the potential for terrorist attack. Some years ago an unarmed, unequipped and untrained female protestor was able to penetrate the Faslane base; if she succeeded, how much easier would it be for organised terrorists to get in and cause havoc?
Apart from the vast cost and the dangers of nuclear weapons, it is being rightly argued by both the Church of Scotland and the Roman Catholic Church that to replace Trident would be morally repugnant. It is the in ultimate hypocrisy for the UK government to stand beside Bush while he threatens other nations like Iran that they are barred from developing nuclear weapons, while planning to renew and extend the life of British WMDs.
The simplest basic reason why we should not replace Trident is that we no longer have enemies against whom we would or could launch such weapons. An independent Scotland should follow the example of Norway which has gained great respect in the world by quietly arranging peace talks between warring factions such as the Palestinians and Israelis.
While some fear that employment in the area round Faslane is dependent on jobs at the base, several factors argue against the replacement of Trident as an insurance for these jobs. In an independent Scotland, we would retain Faslane (and Rosyth) as naval bases. Secondly, it has been reported that the system which the Americans would sell us to replace Trident may well be more suitable for launching from aircraft than submarines.
Among the many good reasons for Scottish independence are the fact that we would have no need of WMDs, therefore we would not have to live beside them, nor would we have the enormous burden of paying for their cost and maintenance. Westminster government policies over the last few years has enormously increased the risk of terrorist attack by tagging along with the U.S. in their foolish aggression in Iraq. With Independence we would be well out of all that.
Author : Dr William S WIlson
|
