 |

|
 |

Aldermaston
Atomic Weapons Establishment Aldermaston & Trident Replacement: a Potted History 2000-2007
|
A small and possibly random selection of events from AWE’s recent history, relating to the new investments and building work. Most of the world (except for, in public, the Government, some MPs and AWE) see these developments as linked to the development of a new generation of nuclear warheads.
For links to further and general information on AWE Aldermaston, see the section of the Aldermaston Blockade webpage.
Three dates in 2000
- 22nd March 2000
- Dr John Rae, Chief Executive of AWE Management Ltd (the consortium that
now runs Aldermaston) reported to the local liaison committee that they
were expecting a one-third reduction in staff and funding:
“Having decided to make the UK deterrent smaller MoD expects a
lower cost, therefore the funding from MoD will come down to a level
which allows the programme to be delivered. As a rough guide there will
be a 1/3 reduction in staff and funding will be reduced on a similar
basis.”
- 20th May 2000
- Nuclear Non-Proliferation (NPT) review conference reaches agreement, including:
“an unequivocal undertaking by the nuclear-weapon states to
accomplish the total elimination of their nuclear arsenals leading to
nuclear disarmament to which all States Parties are committed under Article
VI.”
- 21st May 2000
- Within a day of the NPT agreement in New York, Geoff Hoon (Defence
Secretary) undermined its signifance on the BBC, “there’s no specific
timetable agreed and obviously it is dependent on every other nuclear
weapons state agreeing the same and taking appropriate action.”
Something had changed by 2002
- July 2002
- Leaflet on AWE’s Site Development Strategy Plan published, setting
out several major investments that would enable AWE “to maintain a
capability to design a successor warhead to Trident should it ever be
required in the future.”
- October 2003
- First planning notice for the new ORION laser building submitted by MOD
to the local West Berkshire District Council. After a succession of
planning notices and delays, work on ORION started in 2006 and is
ongoing.
- May 2004
- Adam Ingram (Defence Minister) reported in Parliament that in total 190
visits had been made by UK personnel to nuclear weapons laboratories in the
US, including 219 visitors to the Los Alamos National Laboratories. In
December 2004, the Mutual Defence Agreement, under which the US and UK
share nuclear warhead components and fissile material, was renewed for a
further 10 years.
- 2006
- New Larch supercomputer due to be commissioned in a 20 million
pound contract, delivering almost 30 times the current computing power at
AWE and Cray’s largest system in Europe. In AWE’s words, “Scientific
and technical computing has always played a major role in the design of
nuclear weapons and since the end of underground testing (UGT) this role is
heightened.”
- 2007
- Dr Clive Marsh (Chief Scientist, AWE) states on the AWE website (video
link),
“The [research and development] work splits into two main but
inter-related areas. The first is the requirement to maintain the current
Trident stockpile. The second is to develop our overall warhead design and
assurance capabilities, including the ability to provide a new warhead lest
our government should ever need it as a successor to Trident. Most of our
research is conducted in this capability area.”
AWE developments: stockpile stewardship or new warhead development?
The Government and AWE claim that their new developments relate to
maintenance and stewardship of the current Trident warheads stockpile, and
point repeatedly to the need to comply with the Comprehensive Test Ban
Treaty (CTBT). But Trident warheads were first deployed in 1993, and the UK
ratified the CTBT in 1998, so neither of these can explain the change of
policy from one-third reductions to new investment programmes between March
2000 and July 2002.
Even if we take the Government’s claims at face value, developments at AWE
show that they have chosen an approach to stockpile stewardship that will
make development of new warheads much easier, if not inevitable. Moreover,
leading US scientists have stated that similar investments in the US (coined
’science-based stockpile stewardship’) are not needed merely to maintain
safety and reliability of existing weapons, arguing that this is best
achieved via engineering-based inspection and remanufacture.
(Thanks to BASIC, Greenpeace and AWPC for most of the above.)
Latest press releases about Aldermaston
Last updated: 3rd March 2007
|  |

Search the Website |
|
|
 |
|