A landmark report examining potential alternative UK nuclear weapons bases if Faslane became unavailable following Scottish independence. It demonstrates that there would be no meaningful alternative – suggesting that Independence could hold the key to unravelling the whole of the UK’s nuclear programme.
The Ministry of Defence (MOD) have not made plans for Trident if Scotland were to become independent. Admiral Lord West, former First Sea Lord, criticised the MOD for their failure to investigate the issue thoroughly. He said that, if he was still in post, he would have commissioned a detailed study of alternatives, even if this was contrary to ministerial guidance.
Two key questions include whether the nuclear fleet could be moved and if so to where? The UK Government have acknowledged that relocating Trident would be an enormous exercise, costing billions of pounds and taking many years to accomplish. This report argues that these problems are so great that none of the alternatives are viable.
A key factor is that submarines carry very large quantities of conventional explosives, in the form of rocket fuel for Trident missiles. An accident could result in a conventional explosion equivalent to 500 tonnes of TNT and the dispersal of 160 kilograms of plutonium. Such an accident is most likely to occur in the Explosives Handling Jetty, where missiles and nuclear warheads are loaded onto submarines, but could also happen at the Trident submarine base.
Fifty years ago the MOD drew up a list of possible locations for Polaris, including sites in England and Wales. Today these papers will be dusted off. Officials may also revive an option that was raised in 1981 - basing the UK Trident fleet in the United States. A second overseas possibility would be Ile Longue in France. Building a floating support ship might be a further option.
There were three English sites on the Polaris shortlist. One was Portland, near Weymouth. This was dismissed because there was no suitable location for a nuclear warhead depot nearby. Today there are houses adjacent to the required area. The site was the venue for the sailing events in the 2012 Olympics.
A second alternative was Devonport. In 1963 the MOD considered transforming part of the Cornish shore, opposite the dockyard, into a nuclear weapons’ store. A modern equivalent would be far larger. It would be adjacent to a residential estate as well as being close to the city of Plymouth. It is inconceivable that this would be permitted.
The third location was Falmouth. The proposed submarine base would be on National Trust land close to St Just in Roseland. Acquiring this would be very difficult. The warhead depot would be North of Falmouth. Two villages would be so close to the depot that they would have to be abandoned. In 1963 the MOD concluded that the costs of acquiring and developing this site for Polaris would be so great that the project wasn’t feasible. A Trident depot would be much larger and even less viable.
...
During the Cold War US governments were more interested in Britain making a substantial contribution to conventional forces in Europe than in our nuclear capability. The possibility that the UK would scale back its army, navy and air force to pay for nuclear weapons was a recurring concern in Washington. In recent years the White House has been eager to obtain British support in Iraq and Afghanistan. If faced with a choice, the US is likely to prefer that Britain pays to have troops on the ground rather than Trident. With regard to other nations, some might take the lead from the US or the UK. Others are likely to warmly welcome the new step towards disarmament, whatever the advice from Washington and London.60 In the eyes of many countries, it would not look good if the rUK government sought to coerce, bully or bribe an unwilling young Scotland to host its entire nuclear arsenal.
The Scottish referendum takes place in the context of growing internal questioning of whether Britain can afford to have nuclear weapons and international interest in promoting nuclear disarmament and non-proliferation. A Scotland which votes for independence and then sustains a clear policy of banning these Weapons of Mass Destruction will be able to set an example to the world. If this leads to there being no nuclear weapons on the British islands, then it could help to break the logjam and to encourage global nuclear disarmament.