UK
‘A dangerous waste’: CND condemns Starmer’s commitment to nuclear weapons and militarism
Kate Hudson, CND
By the Campaign For Nuclear Disarmament
CND condemns Keir Starmer and Labour’s commitment to a “triple lock” on Britain’s nuclear weapons, as well as the decision to keep the Tory government’s pledge to spend 2.5% of our GDP on Britain’s military.
Speaking in the north-west of England today, Starmer maintains that Britain will build four new nuclear-armed Dreadnought submarines to replace the current Vanguard fleet, will keep one vessel permanently at-sea and able to launch a nuclear attack, and commits Labour to upgrading the fleet throughout its lifetime. CND estimates the lifetime cost of the Dreadnought programme will be at least £205 billion.
Starmer added that Labour in power will maintain Rishi Sunak’s promise to spend 2.5% of GDP “as soon as resources allow.” During the last budget, the Conservatives said this pledge would be met by 2030 – amounting to £87 billion per year.
CND General Secretary Kate Hudson said:
“After 14 years of Tory misrule, the Labour party has the opportunity to present a bold new security vision to the electorate. However, this policy just mirrors that of the existing government – more war, more military spending and more nuclear weapons. Patently obviously this approach is not bringing peace and prosperity in its wake. On the contrary. Billions are being wasted that should be rebuilding our decaying public services and improving people’s lives. It’s time for a change of policy. The old one has failed – we need to look to the future with a vision to work for peace internationally, improve people’s lives and make us genuinely secure, not an impoverished nuclear target.”
CND Chair Tom Unterrainer said:
“Keir Starmer is trying to make this election about security but has given no justification for how nuclear weapons ensure this. The risk of nuclear war has risen exponentially in the last two years but he offers no real account for how this has developed. For a man who claims to care about international law, there is no mention how expanding and modernising Britain’s nuclear arsenal goes against these norms. We need a bold vision for what real security means: one that puts climate, food security, and people at its heart, not more militarism and conflict.”
- You can follow the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter/X.
- Kate Hudson is the General Secretary of CND: you can follow Kate on Twitter/X.
- This was originally published by CND on 3rd June 2024.
‘Change’ means ditching the two-party consensus on nukes
‘As the election goes on, let’s continue to oppose the rush to war and argue for proper investment in people and our public services’
Ben Hayes
Labour Outlook’s Ben Hayes writes on Starmer’s latest election commitment to nuclear weapons.
It has become a regular fixture of general election coverage for journalists to ask in lurid tones whether party leaders would be willing to use Britain’s nuclear weapons arsenal, consigning potentially millions of people to a painful death, and many more to life-changing injuries. That was the context when, yesterday, as the parties hit their campaigning stride, Keir Starmer said he would be prepared to push the nuclear button and outlined his “triple-lock commitment” to maintaining Britain’s nuclear weapons system. Despite a campaign slogan of “change”, this puts Labour frontbench policy broadly in line with the Tory Party on the issue of military spending and nuclear weapons.
The announcement recommits him to a pledge in the Daily Mail some weeks ago, accompanied by a promise not only to complete the new Dreadnought class submarines at Barrow, but maintain a continuous-at-sea nuclear weapons operation, and to deliver upgrades in the future – despite an on-paper pledge to achieve nuclear disarmament.
It can be seen as part of a wider view – expressed in the I newspaper – that a Labour government would seek to increase military spending to 2.5% of GDP. This would carry our military spending not only above NATO’s demand of 2% of GDP but above the 2.3% figure the Conservative government has already committed for the current year. The announcement by Rishi Sunak that UK defence spending will reach 2.5% of GDP by 2025 is evidence of an arms race between the two main parties.
It comes as the doomsday clock – monitored and examined by the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists – is set at 90 seconds to midnight, the closest we have ever stood towards catastrophe since the bulletin was created by Einstein and Oppenheimer in the 1940s. The bulletin itself has attributed this to the continuing war in Ukraine, the continuation of the global climate breakdown, and the potential for the ongoing attacks on Gaza to transform into a broader regional conflict as we have already seen through the Israeli attacks on Yemen and Iran.
Britain, whilst spending less than a tenth of the US budget – the world’s largest – already has the largest military budget in Europe at around £52bn per year and remains close to Russian spending levels before the Ukraine conflict, despite Russia’s huge nuclear arsenal. The Dreadnought submarine programme to deliver British nuclear weapons is estimated by the Ministry of Defence to cost £31bn but the programme has already spent 20% of a further £10bn allocated as contingency. The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament estimates its lifetime cost at over £200billion.
The nuclear weapons programme is one of numerous major projects to enhance British war-fighting capabilities. Other commitments include fixing the troubled Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers and other navy ships, addressing the delays in developing the Ajax fighting vehicle and other army transport, and servicing the AUKUS Treaty submarine alliance with Australia. The National Audit Office has said the Ministry of Defence’s 2023 Equipment Plan is ‘unaffordable’, hence the need to drive a spending arms race by the main political parties.
The prioritisation of weapons spending is having a dramatic effect on both the current living conditions and the potential futures of young people across Britain and Europe more broadly. While the two largest-spending government departments, health and education, are formally declared as ‘protected’ from spending cuts, the reality is that both are suffering. Other departments providing vital public services, particularly local government and housing, face major cuts in the coming years.
Research from Unison shows that councils in Britain and the devolved nations face a collective funding shortfall of £3.56 billion for the coming financial year with many effectively becoming bankrupt. This funding shortfall has seen many essential public services cut to the bone, such as in Nottingham, where the council is threatening “the closure of our libraries, community centres, and the loss of 500 jobs directly” over the next six months.
There is a similar picture in education. We’ve seen the increase in the number of Free School Meal (FSM) eligible students soar to over 2 million eligible students across Britain in early 2024. We know that at least £12.2bn is needed to restore school spending power just to 2010 levels nationally. This chronic lack of funding has clearly had an impact on schools this year with children in more than 100 schools not being able to start school on time in September because ceilings were falling in and posing a risk to their lives.
The spending war over the defence budget stands in stark contrast. The British government has always, and even now continues, to drum up funds for war and militarisation with reports that Ministry of Defence spending topped £25bn for the first time in the last financial year. All this, while public sector trade unionists in Unison, the RCN, the BMA, the NEU or PCS are repeatedly told there is no money for a much deserved and earned increase in pay or investment in their services.
It’s vital that socialists and progressives inside and outside the Labour party and across the movement reject the prioritisation of warfare over public services, and urgently take up the cause of peace. Join the demonstrations, such as for a ceasefire in Gaza and an arms embargo of Israel; strengthen organisations such as the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and Stop the War Coalition by affiliating your union or party branches or organisations; and support motions calling for our movement to stand against increased military spending. As the election goes on, let’s continue to oppose the rush to war and argue for proper investment in people and our public services.
- Ben Hayes is a regular contributor to Labour Outlook
