The US has the power to turn off British nuclear submarines, raising security issues

Prime Minister Kiel recently called for a photo call from one of the four British nuclear-armed submarines as part of his attempt to demonstrate Britain’s defensive capabilities as tensions continue with Russia.

But priorities face problems. The submarines, and the rest of the British nuclear fleet, rely heavily on the US as its operating partner. And this is not ideal when the US becomes an increasingly unreliable partner under the fully traded presidential leadership. The US can effectively switch between UK nuclear deterrence if it chooses.

The nuclear history of the UK and the US is irreparably interwoven. The United States and the UK cooperated with the Manhattan Project under the 1943 Quebec Agreement and the 1944 memo of Assistant Hyde Park. This work produced the world’s first nuclear weapon deployed in Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1945.

It also led to the first burst. In 1946, the US classified British citizens as “foreign,” preventing them from engaging in secret nuclear works. Collaboration with the UK soon ceased.

The UK has decided to develop its own arsenal of nuclear weapons. The successful explosion of the Grapple Y hydrogen bomb in April 1958 solidified its position as the thermonuclear output.

In the meantime, however, Russia’s launch of the Sputnik satellite in 1957 demonstrated the fatal scope of Soviet nuclear technology. This has brought the US and the UK back as nuclear partners.

Discussions on how to counter the Russian threat have been the foundation of a continuing atomic partnership. The mutual defense agreement, signed in 1958, provided Britain with the latest nuclear technology and affordable access to trustworthy Western allies. The treaty has been revised and adapted over time to reflect changes in US-UK’s working relationships, and the two are so intertwined that it is very difficult to leave the codependent relationship.

Both sides benefited from security and protection, especially during the Cold War. But Trump’s new “special relationship” with Russia’s Vladimir Putin has reconstructed the global order of geopolitics.

Given the unpredictability and potential reliability of the new US administration, serious concerns have been raised about the UK’s nuclear capabilities. Trump could ignore or threaten to end the agreement with a power or light empt show.

British nuclear submarine

The UK’s Trident nuclear deterrence programme consists of four pioneering nuclear-powered and armed submarines. The UK is operationally independent and manages launch decisions, so the UK has autonomy.

However, nuclear technology at the heart of the Trident System is dependent on the US as it is designed and leased by Lockheed Martin. There is no suitable option. Therefore, the Trident System relies on the US for support and maintenance.

The UK is currently upgrading its current system. However, the options seem limited. If the US rejects its commitment, the UK will have to produce its own weapons within its country, working with France and Europe or disarming it. Each scenario creates a new problem for the UK. For example, manufacturing nuclear weapons from scratch in the UK is a costly and long-term activity.

The technical collaboration with France appears to be the most plausible backup option at the moment. The two countries have already introduced a treaty of nuclear cooperation. France has adopted a similar approach to submarine-based deterrence as it suggests that British and French President Emmanuel Macron could use its deterrent to protect other European countries. Another option is to spread costs across Europe and create European deterrence. However, both strategies have re-registered the UK’s current nuclear trust.

These weapons could block hostile nuclear attacks, but they could not prevent a wider attack. Nuclear weapons have not been used in the war for 80 years. Perhaps it is time to completely and permanently dismantle Britain from nuclear deterrence and consider alternative forms of defense.

British nuclear weapons are expensive to maintain. The replacement cost for the Trident is £25 billion. In 2023, the Ministry of Defense reported that the expected costs to support nuclear deterrence would exceed the budget by £7.9 billion over the next decade. The funding could be led by more pressing security threats, such as cybersecurity, terrorism, and climate change.

If the UK cannot act independently, nuclear weapons become strategically redundant. As NATO and the US control the world’s nuclear stage, the UK’s response capabilities are contested. It’s time to decide if the United States is truly our friend or our new enemy.

This article will be republished from the conversation under a Creative Commons license. Please read the original article.