The UK needs its nuclear deterrent to help protect itself and its fellow Nato countries from being attacked by Vladimir Putin’s forces
Nuclear weapons are an abomination, capable of killing millions of people and, indeed, wiping out all of humanity. Unfortunately however, we cannot simply wish them away.
While they remain in the hands of mass-murdering dictators like Vladimir Putin, it is reckless in the extreme to suggest we should unilaterally disarm, as John Swinney did this week, reiterating his party’s official policy.
The First Minister said that “nuclear weapons have not managed to stop the conflict we are wrestling with in Ukraine, which has very direct implications for our own security and safety”, adding: “I think we need to have the capacity to enable us to defend ourselves and to support Ukrainians with conventional weapons.”
A signature mushroom cloud rises from a nuclear bomb explosion on Bikini Atoll in 1954 (Picture: Galerie Bilderwelt)A signature mushroom cloud rises from a nuclear bomb explosion on Bikini Atoll in 1954 (Picture: Galerie Bilderwelt)
A signature mushroom cloud rises from a nuclear bomb explosion on Bikini Atoll in 1954 (Picture: Galerie Bilderwelt) | Getty Images
Nuclear attack on Nato would be suicide
However, Putin knew he could invade Ukraine without triggering a nuclear war precisely because Kyiv had unilaterally agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for security guarantees that proved to be meaningless.
With Donald Trump’s chaotic and reckless approach to international relations making many credible figures question whether the US is still committed to defend its fellow Nato members, now is not the time to surrender the UK’s nuclear deterrent. As horrific as it sounds, and as it is, monsters like Putin need to know that a nuclear attack on Nato would be suicide.
Speaking at Edinburgh University yesterday, Scottish Secretary Ian Murray attacked the SNP’s stance on defence as being “completely and utterly inconsistent and not credible”.
A weighty decision
We do not doubt Swinney’s convictions on nuclear, or indeed the convictions of all those morally opposed to such terrifying weapons. However, for those charged with making decisions about whether or not to retain the UK’s nuclear deterrent, the question is a much weightier one.
Putin and his lackeys have not been shy about threatening to use their nuclear weapons. If no European countries possessed them, the Kremlin could send its conventional forces to take territory while warning that too much resistance would prompt a nuclear strike.
One day we hope the world will be free of the danger of nuclear weapons. But, right now, that day seems a long way off.