Sir, I served in the Fleet Air Arm, 1954-80 — most of the Cold War years — and I am appalled that Britain appears to be sleep-walking back into an entirely inappropriate Cold War strategy of mutually assured destruction — MAD (“Brown ready to call the shots”, June 22).

Britain has no need for a replacement for Trident — or for the new leviathan aircraft carriers on order for the Royal Navy. As well as being a waste of taxpayers’ money, the Trident multiple warhead delivery system, which is capable of wiping out eight cities the size of London or New York with each missile, will serve to motivate rather than deter international terrorism and will immeasurably increase the chances of a nuclear exchange with a rogue state. Such an exchange could threaten not only the survival of Western civilisation but the lives, livelihoods, and wellbeing of billions of people globally.

If the would-be leaders of Britain desire to make poverty history, to end terrorism and to adopt ecologically friendly policies, they must abandon the politics of fear and adopt those that are based on moral courage and statesmanship. This will involve the cancellation of orders for nuclear weapon systems, the cancellation of the aircraft carrier programme, and the earliest possible withdrawal of our inadequately equipped troops from Iraq and Afghanistan.

If the human race is to survive, the West must turn its back on the strategy of nuclear deterrence. Our failure to do so demonstrates to the world the hypocrisy of our foreign policy and strengthens the case of other nations and terrorist organisations for building up their nuclear arsenals. There is now a rare opportunity for Britain to set an example to the world by turning her back on nuclear weapons once and for all.

CHARLES GIDLEY WHEELER
Tetbury, Glos

Sir, In February the Prime Minister told the liaison committee of the House of Commons that there would be “the fullest possible parliamentary debate” on Trident replacement. The Prime Minister’s assured successor has pre-empted this debate.

The decision should not be governed by a consideration of the role of a nuclear deterrent in promoting “British influence”. It should be made on the basis of a full assessment of current and future threats to the UK, the capability of a nuclear deterrent to address such threats, the options and their costs, the strategic context, UK international obligations and proliferation implications.

It is wholly wrong for Gordon Brown to make his judgment before a proper consideration of these issues, and when, as the Defence Secretary confirmed in April, “ministers have not yet begun to consider the position in any detail”.

What is required from the Government is transparency on decision-making, a public consultation process and a White Paper. This is a decision which should only be taken after informed analysis and debate. Given the national importance and the profound international implications, it should also be subject to a vote in the House of Commons.

NICK HARVEY MP
Liberal Democrat Spokesman on Defence

Explore Letters

• Feedback