Embedded Files
MAY 2021 Download this Article
In a rush to get the suitable vaccine and fight the pandemic, a piece of important news has lost its visibility though highly consequent. It may have graver consequence than the pandemic.
The global security environment is undergoing significant changes, which are certainly not characteristic of the cold war era.
At the time the geo-politics was polarized, which is not the case now. We are in a multipolar geopolitical power structure, and hence threats are multipolar too.
Apart from terrorism, the threat of nuclear war has risen. At least, that is the perception the governments the world over have been declaring.
Russian growth of nuclear arsenals has been a cause of worry for NATO. The perceived threat has led to a dramatic change in the UK’s nuclear weapon policy.
While the UK and the USA work closely in their defence outlook, this change in only UK’s approach has raised important questions.
All this while, UK had a nuclear stockpile of 180 warheads. Now, it wants to increase it to 260. So, why this sudden increase?
According to the UK government, the self-imposed cap that lasted for more than two decades was no longer enough to sustain nuclear capabilities as a deterrent.
While the UK continues to believe in nuclear disarmament and reduction in nuclear warhead for global peace, this increase is contrary.
Who is the main threat?
Russia is said to have amassed nuclear arsenals, which makes the position of the UK vulnerable. According to the government’s document, Russia has multi delivery nuclear warheads, which can deliver from land, sea and air.
On the other hand, the UK has only naval capabilities called CASD (Continuous at Sea Deterrent). It is only part of the capability, though.
UK is part of NATO, and therefore any threat to its partners makes NATO capabilities stand against the enemy. Then there is a unique partnership with the USA concerning nuclear weapons.
So the UK is mainly covered if it comes to the threat of a limited nuclear attack.
The UK uses its unique position to strategize its nuclear capabilities. It smartly combines its special relationship with the US and commitment from NATO.
All this while, this typical positioning is working well. Hence, not been changing its stockpile count. It had continued with only the naval nuclear capability. The composite ability of the US and NATO was a proper deterrent.
In the new policy, if deterrent still is the only factor considered Britain, then the increase in stockpile may not be balancing the scale with Russia. Russia will continue to have far more warheads, and delivery capabilities than Britain.
Hence it is certainly not clear what is the objective of Britain’s Nuclear U-Turn.
Is Vintage Deterrent Strategy still valid?
Ever since the end of the great war, all countries possessing nuclear warheads have used them as a deterrent. It has become an expensive weapon in the arsenal, never to be used.
Many more countries and their dictators want to use this strategy. It is working well for North Korea, and even though its economic strength is contrary to its capabilities.
The regime change as sought by west is still a distant dream. Unlike Kim Jong-un, Gadaffi and Mubarak made strategic mistake of not pursuing nuclear arms, hence meeting their fate.
Decades ago, Pakistan and India developed nuclear deterrents. However, they continue to see eye-ball-to-eye-ball with fingers on the button.
Population on either side is under constant threat of a nuclear war. India is likely to increase its stockpile as the threat from China is growing, especially after border skirmish in the summers of 2020.
Iran is perpetually pursuing its nuclear ambitions to thwart threats from Israel and to influence middle-east outcomes.
All of them have nuclear deterrent as a core strategy. Little do we understand that more and more nations get nuclear-armed, the more dangerous the world becomes.
One out of control trigger can start a spiral of nuclear war in different regions.
Is trust in nuclear diplomacy failing?
It is understood, over the years, that nuclear deterrent works and diplomacy prevails. Nuclear deterrent had been secondary to diplomacy.
However, with the current situation in the Middle East, Syria especially, diplomacy has failed. Even though atomic warheads are not required in Syria, the conditions can escalate to nuclear warfare elsewhere, owing to posturing by the superpowers.
Russia continues to still engage assertively in Ukraine. The region continues to be a hostile ground between NATO and Russia. Since the new government in Kyiv is pro-NATO, it is not making Russians happy.
The diplomacy has failed in slowing down the aggression of China in the south China sea. Taiwan continues to be a contested territory and calls for unrestricted democracy in Hong Kong, is adding to the escalating tempers in the region.
The UK has been calling the shots in its previous colony. Supporting its population using diplomatic and immigration tools. However, as Hongkong activists continue to seek political asylum in the UK, diplomacy with China cannot show results.
The global ambition of Russia and China is resting on their nuclear stockpile. So, probably, UK has opened up the option of the increased atomic cache.
Along with that, UK is also making changes to its Vanguard Trident program. In addition, it is upgrading to the Dreadnought Submarine programme.
It is supposed to be the latest state-of-art technology and nuclear delivery system, joining the services in the 2030s.
Vanguard Class submarines had been in service since 1994 and had been a successful deterrent so far.
What is the future of nuclear disarmament then?
No one knows the answer to that. But, while the governments continue to be signatories of NPT, UK has set a bad example. It will open up the gates to defy the moral self-restraint of other countries. Imminently, the nuclear arms race is declared open.
Open Skies Treaty is on tenterhook. The US has withdrawn from the treaty, which allowed unarmed aerial surveillance among members of the signing countries.
It was in November of 2020. In retaliation, Russia withdrew from the treaty in January 2021, just a couple of months later. The hostilities are on the rise, and so is the mistrust.
Currently, there are 34 countries in the treaty, but the future looks bleak. Member countries suitably aligned will be accused of sharing information with either US or Russia.
It will be the start of backdoor surveillance. So much of it happened in the cold war era.
Though the UK may not be responsible for starting the nuclear competition, certainly it added fuel to the growing fear and uncertainty of a nuclear event in this multipolar world.
Do their intelligence community know more than what is already known to the general public?
To Comment: connect@expertx.org
Please indicate if your comments should appear in the next issue
Support Us - It's advertisement free journalism, unbiased, providing high quality researched contents.
Google Sites
Report abuse