Blair: Trident replacement is 'crucial' to Britain's security » Central Government » 24dash.com

Tony Blair warned the House of Commons today that giving up Britain's nuclear arsenal would be 'unwise and dangerous'.

The PM insists the stockpiling of up-to-date missiles will ensure the country retains its nuclear deterrent strategy into the middle of the 21st century at an estimated cost of £15 to £20 billion.

In a concession to critics on the Labour benches, Mr Blair announced that the UK's stockpile of nuclear warheads would be cut by a fifth from around 200 to 160.

He also held out the prospect that technological developments may enable the size of the Trident submarine fleet to be reduced from four to three, cutting the overall cost of the programme.

However, on the principle of retaining the nuclear deterrent, Mr Blair was adamant that it remained "crucial" to Britain's national security.

Despite the end of Cold War, he said that the country faced a range of potential future threats - from the arsenals of existing nuclear powers to the prospect of rogue states sponsoring nuclear terrorism from within their territory.

"In these circumstances, it would be unwise and dangerous for Britain, alone among the nuclear powers, to give up its independent nuclear deterrent," he told the Commons.

With Tory leader David Cameron signalling his continued support for Trident, the Government is expected to win comfortably a Commons vote on the issue due to be held in March next year.

However the decision exposed deep divisions on the Labour benches, with many MPs deeply opposed to the retention of the deterrent beyond the lifetime of the current system.

Former minister Michael Meacher warned that it would "severely restrict" spending on conventional defence systems.

"It will drain off colossal funds from areas like anti-terrorism, climate change and long-term energy and security issues," he said.

In a forward to the White Paper setting out the Government's proposals in detail, Mr Blair said that it was impossible to predict the security climate in 30 or 50 years time when the new system will be in service.

"We cannot be sure that a major nuclear threat to our vital interests will not emerge over the longer term," he said.

"I believe it is crucial that, for the foreseeable future, British Prime Ministers have the necessary assurance that no aggressor can escalate a crisis beyond UK control.

"These are not decisions a government takes lightly. The financial costs are substantial. We would not want to have the terrifying power of these weapons unless we believed that to be necessary to deter a future aggressor."

The decision to go ahead with the replacement of the Trident fleet was formally ratified at a special meeting of the Cabinet before Mr Blair's statement.

It was also agreed that Britain would join a US Navy programme to extend the operational life of the Trident D5 missiles into the 2040s.

The White Paper said that no decision was needed at the moment on updating the nuclear warheads, which will last into the 2020s.

The paper argued that Britain could not contemplate giving up Trident while countries like North Korea and Iran were moving to acquire nuclear weapons.

At the same time, ballistic missile technology was continuing to proliferate while most industrialised countries now had the capacity to develop chemical and biological weapons.

"On our current analysis we cannot rule out the risk either that a major direct nuclear threat to the UK's vital interests will re-emerge or that new states will emerge that possess a more limited nuclear capability, but one that could pose a grave threat to our vital interests," it said.

"Equally there is a risk that some countries might in future seek to sponsor nuclear terrorism from their soil.

"We therefore see an enduring role for the UK's nuclear forces as an essential part of our capability for deterring blackmail and acts of aggression against our vital interests by nuclear-armed opponents."

Under the timetable set out in the White Paper, the Government will still have to extend the lifetime of the existing Vanguard- submarines - which start falling due for replacement from 2017 - by at least five years.

The paper estimates that designing and building their replacements will now take 17 years - three years longer than had been originally thought necessary.

It said an investigation would be carried out to assess whether the design changes could be made to the new submarines to enable the Navy to maintain continuous deterrent patrols with only three vessels.

However Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell insisted that decisions didn't have to be taken until the next decade and he accused Mr Blair of seeking to secure his "legacy" before stepping down as Prime Minister.

"The decision to replace Trident is a significant decision with enormous financial, political and security implications," he said.

"The Prime Minister says this is a matter of judgment. It is my judgment that we can only give proper consideration to all these factors by postponing the decision until 2014."

Copyright - Press Association 2006