Government and Military

Dear Ms Zelter,

Thank you for your letter of 24 January to the Prime Minister about nuclear disarmament. It has been passed to the Secretary of State for Defence and I have been asked to reply. I am sorry for the time this has taken.

As you mention, Stephen Willmer (my predecessor) wrote a very full and comprehensive letter to you on 28 September 2000, and there is little I can add to it. However, I do note that you welcome a number of specific actions taken and documents produced by the UK, particularly in relation to the 2000 NPT Review Conference and its Final Document.

I will just deal with the three issues you highlight: Nuclear Weapons Convention I reaffirm the view of the Foreign Office (which you mention) that, logically, the process of nuclear disarmament will ultimately require the negotiation of a Nuclear Weapons Convention to ban nuclear weapons, just as chemical and biological weapons are banned by the Chemical and Biological Weapons Conventions respectively. But, unfortunately, the reality is that the circumstances do not yet exist to make starting such negotiations a practical proposition. The immediate priority for forward progress must be to secure further deep cuts in the arsenals of the two major nuclear powers. At the same time, the Government continues to press for progress in the internationally agreed next steps towards the global elimination of nuclear weapons: bringing the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty into force and negotiating a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty.

This does not mean that the UK has not been taking action itself in the meantime, and Stephen Willmer’s letter summarised the steps taken following the SDR. An important part of this is the work on the verification of nuclear reductions and elimination by the Atomic Weapons Establishment Aldermaston, funded by the Ministry of Defence, which is therefore continuing, following the completion and publication of the first stage of this work last Spring. The UK has also just ratified the Protocols of the Treaty of Pelindaba, which establishes an African Nuclear Weapon Free Zone. Taking further specific measures As you are aware, the SDR considered more radical de-alerting measures, such as taking submarines off deterrent patrol, and removing warheads from their missiles and storing them separately ashore. In the course of the Review, it was concluded that neither step would be compatible, in current circumstances, with maintaining a credible minimum deterrent with a submarine-based nuclear system. Ending deterrent patrols would mean that new risks of crisis escalation would be run should it be necessary for Trident to sail in times of rising tension. The removal of warheads from missiles would also add a new vulnerability to the United Kingdom’s deterrent posture, which is of particular concern given the reduction to a single nuclear system. It should be emphasised that the patrol submarine operates routinely at a "notice to fire" measured in days, rather than the few minutes Quick Reaction Alert sustained throughout the Cold War. Patrol submarines’ missiles are de-targeted, which has been the case since May 1994. Whether Trident will be replaced Finally, there are no current plans for any replacement for Trident, and no decision on any possible successor system will be needed for several years. However, the SDR concluded that it would be premature to abandon a minimum capability to design and produce a successor to Trident, should this prove necessary. Any decision would be based on a responsible assessment of the security requirements of the LTK, and would be taken in the light of progress towards the Government’s goal of verifiable nuclear disarmament. We do not believe, therefore, that a decision to develop a successor system, should it be taken, would be contrary to the NPT 2000 Review Conference Final Document nor to international law.

Let me conclude by restating the Government’s goal, which is the global elimination of nuclear weapons, and which it continues to pursue.

Yours sincerely,

p.p. Matthew Shaps

Printer friendly version

Home | Top