The UK Government has reiterated its commitment to maintaining the country’s nuclear deterrent, stating that it remains essential for national security for the foreseeable future.
The response came after Labour (Co-op) MP Rachael Maskell (York Central) submitted a written question asking whether it was government policy to support nuclear disarmament.
In response, Defence Minister Luke Pollard underscored the government’s unwavering commitment to the UK’s nuclear deterrent, stating:
“The United Kingdom’s nuclear deterrent exists to deter the most extreme threats to our national security and way of life. It will remain essential for as long as the global security threat picture demands it.”
Pollard further emphasised that the UK’s nuclear capability is maintained not only for national defence but also in support of NATO allies. He made clear that the government’s stance on nuclear weapons was “unshakeable”.
While affirming the UK’s nuclear stance, Pollard acknowledged the long-term goal of global nuclear disarmament but stressed that this must be achieved through a multilateral, step-by-step approach.
“The UK Government believes that the best way to achieve global nuclear disarmament is through a gradual multilateral disarmament negotiated using a step-by-step approach which takes account of the international security environment and is under the framework of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.”
This reflects the UK’s longstanding policy, which ties disarmament efforts to broader global security conditions and relies on international agreements rather than unilateral action.
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) remains the primary framework through which the UK pursues disarmament discussions.
The UK’s nuclear stance places it between maintaining an effective deterrent and supporting long-term global arms reduction. While some MPs and campaigners advocate for faster disarmament, the government maintains that unilateral action would not enhance security given the current global threat landscape.
Is there any sort of technology out there which can transform useless government platitudes into something which delivers something in anyway useful? Maybe something which could speed up provision of nuclear dockside maintenance or possibly remove rust from an aged submarine.
Yes. It’s called budgets or money.
Yes but it’s that transition from saying something to doing something which our politicians seem to find the most distressing.
Scam scam every where but don’t worry , every one is not a cheater, very reliable and profitable site. Thousands peoples are making good earning from it. For further detail visit the link no instant money required free signup and information…….__
For more information about online businesses,
go to.…… 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞/
Working from home offers flexibility and convenience, allowing you to create a personalized workspace. However, it also requires discipline and clear boundaries to
stay productive….. 𝐰𝐰𝐰.𝐏𝐚𝐲𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐡𝟏.𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐞/
Earning over $15k monthly through a simple online job has been a game-changer for me. Last month alone, I earned $17,529 by dedicating just a few hours online. If you’re looking to increase your online income, you can start earning more cash by following the instructions provided here….
Open This——➤ 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐇𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐂𝐨𝐦
Scam scam every where but don’t worry , every one is not a cheater, very reliable and profitable site. Thousands peoples are making good earning from it. For further detail visit the link no instant money required free signup and information…….__
For more information about online businesses,
go to.…… 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐬𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐟𝐢𝐭𝟏.𝐨𝐧𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞/
Agreed.
I hate nuclear weapons. Sadly, in a world of nuclear equipped predators – whose ranks as predators seems to have been joined by the US – I don’t see any alternative to our own nuclear deterrent. Fact is, I feel we need to develop a ‘second string’ – Trident by itself seems to be all or nothing, and yet there aren’t enough Trident equipped subs to be effective as a stand alone deterrent.
I agree Rob. It is now a must have.
Today the whole world is connecting through internet. home based job to makes extra dollars simply working online. i have made and received $20521 from this job and i gave this only 2 hrs from my whole busy day. This job is so easy just like copy and paste work online and money i made from this are just amazing. you also can earns dollars online from home just by follow instructions on this website.
HERE →→→ 𝐖𝐰𝐰.𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐧𝟓𝟒.𝐜𝐨𝐦
Rob. But nuclear weapons have not killed anyone since the 1940s and have saved us from having another world war. They have therefore saved tens of millions of lives. What really kills people are conventional weapons.
I was curious, though I suspected.
So I checked Rachael Maskell’s views and voting record on Trident.
Yep.
Always the western democracies which must disarm first.
Rachel would obviously be happy to live under a Russian boot.
Quite right. And even if by some miracle the whole world decided to disarm and dispose of their nuclear weapons, the second a threat arose nukes would just be rebuilt again – the whole thing would be moot. Just look at how quickly all those treaties on landmines and cluster munitions have fallen by the wayside
Nuclear disarmament has been, is, and will always be, stupid. One cannot simply wish away a technology or rely on happy thoughts to defend oneself. Nuclear weapons exist, and will continue to exist, so being able to respond in kind is a necessity to survival.
Even if somehow all the nuclear weapons were to suddenly vanish, they would not be terribly difficult or time consuming to recreate, and dictatorships would be much more likely to do so quickly and use them, whilst democracies are talking about whether there is a threat, and if we perhaps, should maybe, at some point in the near future but not when we are in charge and have to pay for it, spend some money on arming ourselves.
Frankly anyone with eyes should be able to see that we need to be increasing our supply of nuclear weapons and methods of delivery, there would be many thousands of Ukrainians still alive today if they had retained them, this is life and death for millions of people, this is not a game.
By all accounts, Ukraine had no way to use them other than as dirty bombs.
I’ll actually go a step further and forecast the consequences of Russia breaking the Budapest memorandum and the US failing to hold them account over it.
If we’re a betting man I’d be amazed if someone in Ukraine, Poland, Sweden or Finland wasn’t looking at developing their own Nuclear weapons. And in Swedens case it wouldn’t need very long at all as they got very close to an underground text back in the 60’s. They are what’s called “a latent nuclear power”.
It’s the logical conclusion to what’s happened in Ukraine and Putins Aim to Salami slice Easter Europe.
And in Ukraines case that theory may well explain why trump wants the US to take over their Nuclear plants.
Interestingly the US is now in full violation of the Budapest treaty as clause three prohibits extorting Ukraine over resources.
It does not protect the UK from the wokeys and hard left-leaners who are campaigning to destroy our history and culture from within.
Past its best, neglected, shabby, not as tough or independent as it thinks it is. Yes it is the British way of life in the 2020s.