The UK has a small number of nuclear submarines, called Trident. There were two nuclear bases. Faced with a need for economy the English one was closed down, and the one in Scotland (less practical) was maintained as a sop to the Scots, although the nationalists are against nuclear weapons and didn’t want Trident there in any case (although they wanted the jobs).

The public’s knowledge about Trident is sketchy in the extreme. In a recent survey of young people, 34% thought that renewing Trident would cost up to £5 billion. In fact, it’s estimated to cost up to £100 billion. How can anyone realistically justify a figure like that and simultaneously try to cut the National Health Service? The government asserts that nuclear weapons are essential to prevent Britain from foreign attacks and nuclear blackmail. Nuclear weapons, however small in number, “guarantee” a place at the international table, they maintain.

This is nonsense. The British are not going to use Trident to blackmail anyone, and Putin will not be deterred by a few warheads that won’t be used. This is the moment to shift the emphasis of defense away from Trident and nuclear submarines. Moreover, there is an opportunity to disarm as required by the Non-Proliferation Treaty (a treaty the public is but dimly aware of).

An Epicurean government, a contradiction in terms, would close down, the Trident base in Scotland and promote pan-European defense with a beefed up conventional force from the savings of Trident. Thank you for the idea, Scottish nationalists! (cost of Trident quoted by Claudia Hyde, Huffington Post 09/2014).