|

Spiking Trident's guns

JEREMY CORBYN explains how scrapping our WMD would give Britain the moral authority to push for global nuclear disarmament.
FOUR months ago, the Commons voted to continue work on the replacement of the Vanguard-class submarines which carry the Trident nuclear warhead system.
Two months ago, the British government representative John Duncan addressed the Non Proliferation Treaty (NPT) review preparatory committee, in which he said that there was no inconsistency in the British position of both replacing Trident and supporting the NPT.
In the House of Commons, there was a special debate on Tuesday on Britain's participation in the NPT in which I set out the desperate need to not just adhere to the provisions of nuclear disarmament but also to ensure that we do everything we can to encourage the US and Russia to have urgent talks to renew the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START), which is due to expire in 2009.
The NPT was originally conceived by the Irish government in 1968 and, with the support of the many counties in the non-aligned movement, it was eventually successful in persuading the then five declared nuclear weapon states to sign it.
There are three pillars to the NPT. The first is a requirement for the five nuclear weapons states to take part in the eventual disarmament of their weapons systems. No date is set for this, but the requirement states "at an early opportunity."
The second pillar of the treaty is a requirement that all signatory nations who are not already in possession of nuclear weapons will not acquire them and that the five declared states will not supply them with nuclear weapons technology.
The third pillar of the treaty is the peaceful use of nuclear power so that any state is legally entitled to develop its own nuclear power systems.
All signatory nations are subject to a prearranged inspections system, with a more recent supplementary protocol, which has so far been signed by 30 nations, allowing for instant and unannounced inspections.
The NPT is subject to reviews every five years and the next is due in 2010. It will play a crucial role in efforts to halt the proliferation of nuclear weapons, which are being threatened on three fronts.
North Korea has attempted to develop nuclear weapons and has tested a limited delivery system for them. But, thanks to the six-party talks, enormous progress has been made, with an agreement to provide appropriate aid and trade with North Korea in return for its abandonment of the weapons programme.
If this is seen through, it will be a victory for diplomacy over military threat and should be welcomed.
India and Pakistan have both developed nuclear weapons, essentially targeted at each other, and, while neither country is a signatory to the NPT, it is important that a way be found to bring both within the orbit of the NPT and to try to encourage the process of nuclear disarmament.
Sadly, despite initial condemnations of both countries for the development of weapons and a delivery system, India has been rewarded with US nuclear technology as part of a process of trying to drag it into the friendship zone of the US.
Pakistan has been promised as much, but at some point in the future. The current instability in Pakistan and its transfer of nuclear technology to other countries demonstrates just how dangerous the possibilities are of serious nuclear proliferation.
Israel, which is not a signatory to the NPT, has developed over 200 nuclear warheads and has a sophisticated delivery system for them. The world only knew of the existence of Israel's nuclear weapons because of the personal bravery of Mordechai Vanunu, who told the Sunday Times about this in 1984.
Afterwards, he was kidnapped and taken to Israel, where he served 18 years in prison, 13 of them in solitary confinement. Disgracefully, the Israeli government still denies him the right to travel and prevents him from speaking to foreign nationals. He may well go to prison again soon for alleged breaches of these ridiculous conditions.
Proposals for a nuclear-free Middle East that were initially advanced by Saudi Arabia are clearly impossible while Israel is in possession of such enormous nuclear firepower. The recent Non Proliferation Treaty review conference was dominated by the issue of Iran, which has signed the NPT but not the protocol which allows instant inspections.
Iran claims that it is developing nuclear power, which it is entitled to do, and denies that it is developing nuclear weapons. The International Atomic Energy Agency has imposed sanctions on Iran because of the claim, principally led by the US but supported by the EU and, to some extent, Russia, that it is developing nuclear weapons.
A nuclear-free Middle East can only be achieved by putting huge pressure on Israel and by serious engagement with Iran, rather than sanctions and threats of military action, which are most likely to have the effect of increasing the political influence of those who want to militarise Iran with nuclear firepower.
In her reply to the debate on Tuesday, newly appointed minister Meg Munn supported the speech made by former foreign secretary Margaret Beckett to the Carnegie conference for peace, which was held in the US in June.
In her speech, Beckett gave full support to the principles of the NPT and looked forward to the possibility of a nuclear-free world. She quoted brave historic campaigns such as the abolition of slavery and the work toward achieving the millennium development goals as being similar parallels of optimism and hope over present reality.
Beckett envisaged that Britain would become a laboratory for disarmament and would be a major player in the NPT process. This is a very welcome idea, but there is one serious non sequitur in the process.
Britain signed the NPT in 1970 and has reduced its tally of warheads to 160, with 48 available on patrol in submarines at any one time. Those 48 represent the equivalent of Hiroshima and Nagasaki many many times over in their potential for lethal and indiscriminate destruction of human life.
Next month, on August 6, we will once again commemorate Hiroshima Day, when we mourn the dead in Japan. Parliament voted in March to continue developing the submarine system, but it will be invited to vote again on the funding of Trident in about two years.
Perhaps it's time for new Foreign Secretary David Miliband to embrace the warm words that his predecessor gave to the Carnegie Institute and set an example by saying that we will proceed no further with Trident replacement so that we have real moral authority when the NPT review takes place in just under three years.
Tory MP David Liddington quoted with approval the Bishop of Rochester's claim that nuclear weapons have brought us security.
The bishop would do well to listen to his superior, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, who has warned that many will never accept the morality of even threatening other countries with "horrendous" and "intrinsically indiscriminate" weapons.
Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali should recognise that the "security" that nuclear weapons bring is an illusion.
How can it make us more secure for every country in the world to develop weapons that can indiscriminately slaughter millions in any part of our planet?
Jeremy Corbyn is Labour MP for Islington North. He can be contacted at corbynj@parliament.uk