Where is scrutiny of UK's nuclear submarine plans?

The National

14 hours ago

In particular, there has yet to be any serious scrutiny of the proposal to build 12 nuclear-propelled submarines under the Aukus agreement, the military co-operation agreement between the US, UK and Australia.
This scrutiny is especially necessary given that the Pentagon this week announced a review of its commitment to the agreement, raising questions about whether the billions of pounds committed by the UK Government are destined for the drain.
The Aukus agreement's main aim is the material support of the Australian Navy in the Indo-Pacific, primarily by providing it with eight nuclear-powered submarines of the kind announced in the SDR. This means several of the 12 nuclear submarines will probably end up lurking around in the South China Sea, contributing nothing to the defence of the UK and raising regional tensions.
READ MORE: Jeremy Corbyn says police 'picked on him' as Gaza protest case dropped
No mainstream journalist or news organisation has questioned the Government over whether this is a sensible use of public resources or even a rational 'defence' strategy in any meaningful sense of the word.
There has been no coverage of the fact the Government's watchdog the Infrastructure and Projects Authority (IPA) recently declared the manufacture of nuclear reactors to power the new Dreadnought submarines 'unachievable'. It gave the nuclear reactor project its lowest rating of 'red' in January of this year, as reported by The Ferret in February.
While the IPA assessment rated the delivery of the new Aukus-class submarines as 'amber' ('facing significant issues requiring management attention'), it is widely assumed that the same nuclear reactors will power both the prospective nuclear-armed Dreadnought and Aukus submarines.
In short, the Government's own infrastructure office just this year assessed that an indispensable component of all these submarines is not deliverable. This was hardly given a moment's airtime during the media furore on the SDR.
(Image: PA)
This alone is a serious indictment of Britain's elite journalists and indicates that their role has not been to question the Government's obscene military spending plans but rather to promote them. It therefore falls to citizens and civil society to raise the questions over serious doubts about the Government's costly nuclear plans.
The Pentagon's review of its commitment to Aukus to determine if it aligns with the new administration's 'America First' agenda carries a weight of irony. Less than two weeks ago, UK Defence Secretary John Healey was espousing the supposed great benefits of the 'special relationship' with the US in terms of military co-operation and trade.
Wednesday's development highlights just how little the UK gains from obsequiously aligning with US geopolitical interests, such as attempting to corral China in the Indo-Pacific.
The unreliability of this relationship should compel a total reassessment of the predominant ideology about UK security, which currently prioritises being an arm of the US military in far-flung corners of the world over genuine domestic security.
UK CND recently published an Alternative Defence, focusing on strengthening domestic social investment and a programme for common international security. The full report is on the UK CND website.
The UK Government's irrational and incoherent military spending plans come at a time when the current generation of submarines based at Faslane are in an increasingly atrocious state of disrepair. Serious radioactive risk incidents at the naval base are increasing.
The Vanguard nuclear-armed submarines are going on record-long assignments while their substitutes sit rusting in the repair docks. Crew are likely enduring awful conditions during six-month stints underwater, with some reports saying they ran out of food during the last assignment.
Meanwhile, the Dreadnoughts that will supposedly replace these ailing vessels are unlikely to enter service for 10 years at least – if the reactors to power them can be built at all.
The UK's nuclear superpower farce is unsustainable and a disaster waiting to happen. Those of us who understand this in Scotland must support the parties which oppose nuclear weapons in the run-up to the 2026 election, and keep up the pressure on Scottish parliamentarians to support the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.
Samuel Rafanell-Williams is Scottish CND's communications officer