The Intelligence2 Debate

The motion: Britain Doesn’t Need Trident

Harrowing stuff. Helena Kennedy QC began by invoking the memory of Hiroshima. ‘Peeling skin, melting eyeballs. People on pavements vomiting and waiting for death.’ Though she made the pacifist argument Lady Kennedy wasn’t suggesting that to scrap Trident was ‘some wild left-wing peacenik plan’. She cited conservative figures like Simon Jenkins and Lord Bramall, a former defence chief of staff, who both oppose renewing the nuclear deterrent.

The opposition was led by Sir Michael Quinlan, former permanent secretary at the Ministry of Defence. The lovable mandarin elaborated his urbane arguments in a rapid, fluting delivery. The £20 billion cost of replacing Trident is cheap compared with what the French are paying, he said. We build the subs and missiles ourselves. We import the warheads from America. The French version is entirely homemade and costs them four times as much. Applying himself to the unilateralist argument he made the unanswerable point that ‘eliminating nuclear weapons does not eliminate the problem of nuclear weapons’. To want nukes is not the same as liking them. They’re ghastly things but they have benefits. Since Hiroshima, he pointed out, there have been no conflicts between major world powers. That’s not an accident. Nuclear weapons have liberated humanity from large-scale wars.

Most popular

Jawad Iqbal

Blue Origin’s all-female space flight was a step backwards for feminism

Jonathan Freedland, a Guardian columnist and an amusingly relaxed presence in the chair, introduced Angus Robertson of the SNP with a dig. ‘He’s been called the hardest working MP in Westminster — although his critics would say that’s not saying much.’ Robertson replied ironically. ‘Thank you for those kind words, Jonathan. You’ll find the Guardian doesn’t sell much in Scotland.’ Scotland was Robertson’s theme. Trident is a huge issue there because ‘Scotland has the highest mega-tonnage of offensive nuclear capability in the world.’