This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/jul/01/trident-nuclear-missile-renewal-study

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Trident gets thumbs up in report that will dismay anti-nuclear campaigners Trident gets thumbs up in report that will dismay anti-nuclear campaigners
(3 days later)
A three-year study into the value of renewing Britain's Trident nuclear missile programme in 2016 has come out in favour of retaining it, saying the weapons could yet prove their worth in preventing national blackmail or another security threat.A three-year study into the value of renewing Britain's Trident nuclear missile programme in 2016 has come out in favour of retaining it, saying the weapons could yet prove their worth in preventing national blackmail or another security threat.
The verdict will dismay anti-nuclear campaigners, although the commission's membership, drawn heavily from the establishment, meant it was always likely.The verdict will dismay anti-nuclear campaigners, although the commission's membership, drawn heavily from the establishment, meant it was always likely.
The UK government is due to make a decision about renewing the programme in 2016 at a cost of billions of pounds, prompting calls for a scaled-down nuclear deterrent or even total disarmament.The UK government is due to make a decision about renewing the programme in 2016 at a cost of billions of pounds, prompting calls for a scaled-down nuclear deterrent or even total disarmament.
But the 43-page report by the cross-party Trident commission – which includes two former defence secretaries, Labour peer Lord Browne, and the Conservatives' Sir Malcolm Rifkind, as well as former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell – backs the nuclear deterrent.But the 43-page report by the cross-party Trident commission – which includes two former defence secretaries, Labour peer Lord Browne, and the Conservatives' Sir Malcolm Rifkind, as well as former Liberal Democrat leader Sir Menzies Campbell – backs the nuclear deterrent.
In its key finding, it says: "If there is more than a negligible chance that the possession of nuclear weapons might play a decisive future role in the defence of the United Kingdom and its allies in preventing nuclear blackmail or in affecting the wider security context with which the UK sits, then they should be retained."In its key finding, it says: "If there is more than a negligible chance that the possession of nuclear weapons might play a decisive future role in the defence of the United Kingdom and its allies in preventing nuclear blackmail or in affecting the wider security context with which the UK sits, then they should be retained."
The commission cites the re-emergence of Russia as a potential threat.The commission cites the re-emergence of Russia as a potential threat.
The Ministry of Defence is committed to building four new nuclear submarines after 2016 to replace its ageing fleet. The Liberal Democrats argue in favour of reducing the fleet to three. Some voices within the MoD have rejected three as untenable, while others argue the money allocated for the nuclear programme should be spent on conventional forces.The Ministry of Defence is committed to building four new nuclear submarines after 2016 to replace its ageing fleet. The Liberal Democrats argue in favour of reducing the fleet to three. Some voices within the MoD have rejected three as untenable, while others argue the money allocated for the nuclear programme should be spent on conventional forces.
The cost of the four submarines, plus missiles and warheads, is roughly estimated at £2.9bn each year between 2016 and 2062, peaking in the 2020s at around £4bn (at 2012 prices). As this would take up a bigger slice of defence spending than planned, other projects face being cut.The cost of the four submarines, plus missiles and warheads, is roughly estimated at £2.9bn each year between 2016 and 2062, peaking in the 2020s at around £4bn (at 2012 prices). As this would take up a bigger slice of defence spending than planned, other projects face being cut.
Ironically, the report was set up by a group dedicated to nuclear disarmament, the British American Security Information Council.Ironically, the report was set up by a group dedicated to nuclear disarmament, the British American Security Information Council.
Paul Ingram, executive director of BASIC, said: "The reason why we set up the commission was to stimulate a debate that we perceive has been dominated by electoral calculation. We believe Britain is well placed to lead global nuclear disarmament by renewing Trident." Paul Ingram, executive director of BASIC, said: "The reason why we set up the commission was to stimulate a debate that we perceive has been dominated by electoral calculation. We believe Britain is well placed to lead global nuclear disarmament by not renewing Trident."
The report has an interesting wrinkle on the long-debated issue of how independent the UK's nuclear deterrent is. Although several British governments have insisted that it is independent of the US, the report says: "If the United States were to withdraw their cooperation completely, the UK nuclear capability would probably have a life expectancy measured in months rather than years."The report has an interesting wrinkle on the long-debated issue of how independent the UK's nuclear deterrent is. Although several British governments have insisted that it is independent of the US, the report says: "If the United States were to withdraw their cooperation completely, the UK nuclear capability would probably have a life expectancy measured in months rather than years."
• This article was amended on 3 July 2014. An earlier version omitted the word "not" in a quote from Paul Ingram.