Fact to know: Nuclear weapons exist in most countries purely to deter other countries from invading/using their own nukes
This is obviously true, and the conversation is about various forms of residual risk and their mitigation, like accidents involving nuclear weapons, misunderstandings where countries falsely think they are under attack, political instability (e.g. nuclear weapons forward positioned in Turkey becoming vulnerable to change in host government), acquisition by terrorists, concerns that proliferation to governments such as Iran might destabilise deterrence etc.
also the large cost of maintaining a weapons system that you are clear you will never use. There’s money on the table, if only you could trust the other parties to abide by an agreement…
Personally, I think Ukraine conflict shows that the UK certainly ought to keep its nuclear deterrent, and maybe ought to scale it up significantly
Topic: Nuclear weapons
Fact to know: Nuclear weapons exist in most countries purely to deter other countries from invading/using their own nukes
This is obviously true, and the conversation is about various forms of residual risk and their mitigation, like accidents involving nuclear weapons, misunderstandings where countries falsely think they are under attack, political instability (e.g. nuclear weapons forward positioned in Turkey becoming vulnerable to change in host government), acquisition by terrorists, concerns that proliferation to governments such as Iran might destabilise deterrence etc.
also the large cost of maintaining a weapons system that you are clear you will never use. There’s money on the table, if only you could trust the other parties to abide by an agreement…
Personally, I think Ukraine conflict shows that the UK certainly ought to keep its nuclear deterrent, and maybe ought to scale it up significantly