Credible Deterrent

The Chief of the Defence Staff (shortly to retire) has said that if you cannot afford Trident it is better to have nothing. His argument is that anything less will not deter and no deterrent is better than a weak one. It sounds good but it is rubbish.

In many ways Trident is no longer credible because of its sheer power. Frying continents in one strike is a Cold War doctrine. Current and developing threats are rather different. A more flexible, less drastic, Hiroshima level weapons system based on cruise missiles from the A Class submarines may actually be better. All this needs to be carefully evaluated. We need a deterrent certainly, but like the battleship, a more sophisticated requirement may be making Trident obsolete. 

What is needed is considered analysis, not emotive declarations. Once again I emphasise the need for the effective defence of these islands, come what may. The anniversary of the Battle of Britain which hinged upon two outstanding fighters, an advanced radar warning system and a few very brave and very young men, reminds us that the secret of our security relies on our being too hard a nut to crack. We must translate that into modern arms.