The UK’s planned air-launched nuclear capability for its F-35A Lightning II aircraft will rely on US-controlled weapons under NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangements, the Ministry of Defence confirmed.
Responding to a parliamentary question from Conservative MP Mike Wood, Minister of State for Defence Luke Pollard reiterated that the nuclear weapons assigned to NATO’s dual capable aircraft mission are United States assets and remain under US control and custody.
“As confirmed when the Ministry of Defence announced our intention to participate in NATO’s nuclear mission, the nuclear weapons allocated to the NATO dual capable aircraft nuclear mission are United States nuclear weapons and the US retains control and custody over them, as the UK does with its own nuclear weapons,” Pollard said in his written response.
He added that any potential UK participation in the NATO mission would be subject to political authorisation.
“The NATO DCA nuclear mission would operate under the orders of NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe, when authorised by NATO’s Nuclear Planning Group, through which Allies exercise political control over the mission,” he stated. “The UK would always retain the right to participate, or not participate, according to a political decision by the UK Prime Minister.”
A waste of scarce resources. Nothing more than a political ploy for the benefit of government and the “trade deal”.
Agreed. And for Starmer to announce something to NATO in Paris while in reality continuing to cut the military.
If they were serious, which they are not, order 72 B then announce the intention of buying 60 odd A.
But there is no money, and tens of billions are allocated to Tempest, so, as usual, the military gets on with what it can get.
The idea which has merit is that the F35A is much cheaper and less maintenance intensive but can be used for the OCU squadron. Having an OCU squadron of scarce £100 fighters is a waste of money but this way the OCU can have a war time role without the need for expensive inclusion of a new aircraft type in service.
It makes a lot of sense and is the easiest cheapest way for the UK to get access to tactical nuclear weapons.
If we get to the point of dropping nuclear weapons from F35’s then no one will care about the OCU.
Training wise, it does.
F35 was meant to be about enabling our Carriers.
Less B might be mitigated by UCAV, or it might not, going by HMG grandstanding and a long list of UCAV Drone programs that get highlighted and then cancelled.
Still a gimmick at the end of the day for me.
He has nothing to show NATO otherwise beyond Trident.
In an age of smart munitions all tactical nuclear weapons are a gimmick.
This way we can have the gimmick and it doesn’t cost us much
Agreed. Possibly both governments low grip of understanding defence and raf making a play.
So we need our own air launched nuclear weapons! Given the nature of US involvement in NATO under their current regime this capability is perhaps a bit pointless. Let us have more Typhoons instead.
No
No what?
I have said before that the Trident W76-2 tactical 6 to 7 kt warhead would be the quickest, cheapest way for the UK to regain tactical nukes. Package it in a Paveway IV body with the JDAM-ER wingkit & it can be launched by RAF Typhoon & RAF/FAA F-35.
The problem is if we want a seat at the big table we’ll then we need to make a symbolic gesture. A dozen A version of the f35 with US controlled weapons is all it is. A bloody expensive gesture.
We don’t need anything extra to keep a seat at the table! Lets boost conventional capability to lessen the likelihood of only being left with an all or nothing M.A.D. response.
We are one the founding members of NATO, without tactical nukes we have less influence. Its all about politics and prestige.
So give the 12 RAF F-35A, AARGM-ER/JSOW-C or JSM. All off the shelf options.
UK has a nuclear ballistic boat permanently at sea not a gesture just fact putin has to live with
‘Air launch’ = free fall bombs ( low tech)
Air launched from High Tech 5th gen Stealth Jets though.
How is this news? Obviously US tactical nukes need US authorisation to be used. If we had decided to resume developing our own tactical nukes then that would be news, given that we retired them 30 years ago.
This is all gesture politics by the Starmer Regime. A pointless exercise. Fit a few Tomahawks or something else with a tactical warhead. Why should a pilot have to fly over a target to drop a gravity bomb in 2025? I seem to recall discussion a few years ago about Storm Shadow having a sub strategic nuclear capability if the warhead was small.
As for Tomahawks of course that would require a few Astutes to be operational……the circus is still in town.
OK I’ve said this before so nuke me. these small bombs will be dropped on friendly territory on top of russian invasion force. assuming we are not bombing mother russia lead to outright nuke exchange. better optics if europeans nuke their own land
Utterly pointless ‘capability’.
Still such a dumb move!
Switching funds for 12 F35A means 12 less that are carrier capable and opens the door to the persistent LM / RAF lobby for more, certainly at the expense of any further F35B’s and potentially even jeopardising GCAP numbers / in-service date.
And all so we can save relatively paltry sums for an OCU of air-frames that’ll probably never be armed, with only a theoretical ability to carry US controlled nukes.
All at a time when there’s a growing list of serious defence priorities being unfunded in an even more dangerous world.
Madness!!!
Or is this an expensive way of ensuring that the US keeps its bases in the UK?