I say no to Trident! (but at least talk about it)

At least something good might come out of the Labour conference. Three senior ministers are on board for a debate and a vote on the nuclear deterrent in the form of the Trident missile. Peter Hain, Hilary Benn and Harriet Harman protested after the party blocked a debate on the issue. The government is not yet committed to a new version of the Trident missile which would cost of 25 billion GBP but that's the way the wind is blowing. They do not want an open debate and hope to make the decision within the Cabinet.

There are many issues that need to be discussed and resolved:

In a post cold war era whom are we attempting to deter and will it work? In my mind it would not be effective against a rogue state and could only be used for revenge. Would a British government ever use it for this purpose? I don't wish to ask (or answer this question for the US.)

Does replacing the system violate the anti-proliferation treaty? I think so. However the major powers have been in violation of this treaty since before the ink was dry. It was really only meant to apply to other countries anyway. We know how that's turned out: Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea!

Would the new systems be free and independent? Would the UK have the authority and the power if the US disagreed? This is critical. The government has always asserted that it would be independent but experts have disagreed. They contend that the US might retain the power to prevent the missiles from being used. This is critical. The rogue state that worries me the most is America. They (we) have the most weapons and the government is drifting further from the no first strike policy every day.

This debate is important and it is good to see ministers standing up for this. (This includes Peter Hain who is not my favourite.)