Trident, Faslane.
Those two words have a kind of fuzzy, almost mythical feel to them. Trident, being something a huge bearded man
of the sea holds and Faslane almost because of the fame of the Peace Camp
there, a place I love to visit, has a beautiful feel to it. The positivity of those in the Peace Camp is
wonderful to be part of and once a year, friends and I go up to celebrate the
Peace Camp’s birthday. This celebration
is matched with a hope that each year is the last the camp is needed and
recently we have been cheered by the fact that post September 2014, this may
well be the case (the most recent celebration can be seen HERE). Let’s not be fooled
though, Faslane on the Gareloch, just 30 miles out of Glasgow, is one of the
most deadliest places ever built by humanity.
The missiles serviced from that place could contribute, in a matter of
hours, to the total annihilation of life as we know it.
Keep the weapons?
 |
| SSP Campsie/ Acting Strange Theatre Co's recent visit to Faslane |
The argument for retaining nuclear weapons in Scotland goes
something like this. “If we don’t have
them we are open to invasion and with North Korea, Iran and other unfriendly
nations developing them, we need to ensure we deter their use.”
This argument has never been convincing to me. Why would North Korea or any other nation
want to use the leverage of nuclear weapons against Scotland, or the UK for
that matter? For our resources? For our mountains? For our great taste in
music? And if North Korea, by a huge leap of technology was able to launch
nuclear weapons at the West of Scotland, would there be any justification in
ordering a naval officer to launch our weapons of indiscriminate mass murder at
the poor and wretched of North Korea? By
the annihilation of millions of North Koreans, have we ensured justice has been
carried out? Revenge? Or just as unjustifiable mass murder as the
original act?
Tit-for-tat
As a child, nearly forty years ago, I wrote to CND to
express my disbelief that a tit-for-tat nuclear war could in any way progress
mankind. I remember finding it really
illogical that anyone would threaten a retaliative strike, knowing that it
would only go towards doubling the amount of innocent deaths. I guess now, knowing real statistics
surrounding these WMD on the Clyde, I can honestly say, I have not moved in my
thinking on this. It still does not make
sense to me that we would, if another country launched nukes at us, allow
reciprocal mass murder in our name.
Waste of resources
I have no doubt that these huge waste of our resources will
be moved from the Clyde in 2016, after negotiations have finished after a Yes
vote in the Scottish referendum. For
some of my comrades this is enough reason to vote yes. This and the fact that millions of pounds
could then be diverted into housing, schools, hospitals, the welfare of our old
and vulnerable etc. Some people have
said to me, “surely we would only be moving the weapons South of the border,
which, yes, takes them out of our territory, but into the backyards of our
English, Welsh or Northern Irish brothers and sisters.” I disagree.
The MOD have ruled out moving the weapons to Devonport,
which is perhaps the only place that is suitable in England to house them. This is because of the risk to the nearby
population (they don’t seem to be so concerned about the fact that the weapons
are only 30 miles from the centre of Scotlands most populated city!) http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/jan/04/mod-nuclear-submarines-scotland-plymouth
After the first Minister of Wales commented that the weapons
would be welcome there, a huge outcry has ensured he has distanced himself from
his own comments and opposition from
Plaid Cymru has ensured this just will not happen. His comments are a huge shot in the foot for the Welsh Labour Party.
Northern Ireland possesses the deep water Loughs necessary
for the Vanguard submarines (or any successor), but the MOD don’t seem to be in
any hurry in building a successor to Faslane there – a task you would think
should really begin soon as the date of independence is fast approaching. Besides, would the US allow, after all, what
are weapons controlled by them, to be housed in a place most Americans believe
will become part of a neutral republic?
I think not.
When Scotland votes Yes in the referendum, I firmly believe
this will see the end of nuclear weapons based on the British Isles. Whether or not NATO decides to house them
elsewhere on the European mainland is contentious. Germany would almost certainly after it’s
recent moves to completely de-nuclear itself, not take the weapons. France already houses its own weapons and
virtually nowhere else in Europe makes strategic sense. The combination of the fact that no-where
else in the UK want to house them and the ruling out of a move to anywhere in
Europe, means that Trident, come 2016, will indeed be scrapped.
Scrapped.
All of the present noises by the Liberal Democrats and
Tories, and indeed the once proudly unilateralist Labour Party (a party that
“once proudly” can be said about most of it’s policies) are to ensure the
vested interests of the share holders of the huge companies involved in the MOD
contracts will not immediately pull their capital. BAE, SERCO and the rest have four years to
stop investor flight. Watch carefully
how the four sub option becomes two and then becomes none.
This post originally appeared on the Huffington Post site HERE
This post originally appeared on the Huffington Post site HERE
