Blix vs Blair (But this time it is over our weapons of mass destruction)

Dr Hans Blix, the former UN weapons inspector, is to launch an attack on Tony Blair today, arguing that by renewing Britain's Trident nuclear weapons, Blair is making the west's task in challenging Iran's nuclear proliferation much harder.

It is an argument that I have made on here many times. Nuclear non proliferation works both ways. And we can't expect other nations to treat us seriously as we demand that they adhere to agreements that we are blatantly in breach of.

Even from a practical point of view, a British nuclear weapon is simply a vanity; a yearning for the old days when Britain had an empire and was a serious world power. That is no longer the case and any British nuclear weapon would not be allowed to be used without American permission, which sort of renders it useless.

However, Blair has determined that this will be part of his legacy and Blix's observations will be unwelcome in Downing Street as Blix is speaking the language that many old Labour supporters like myself fully agree with.

The respected chairman of the Commission on Weapons of Mass Destruction will use a speech in London to renew hostilities with Mr Blair. He will say that modernising Britain's arsenal puts the non-proliferation treaty (NPT) under "strain" and increases the feeling among non-nuclear states, such as Iran, that they are being "cheated" by the nuclear states.

Dr Blix will take Britain and the other permanent members of the UN Security Council - America, China, Russia and France - to task for failing to comply with their obligations under the NPT by failing to do more to eliminate their nuclear arsenals. He will point out "the strong feelings of frustration" at the way nuclear nations "are in the process" of developing new types of weapons rather than examining how they could manage defence needs with non-nuclear weaponry.

Blix's intervention may be enough to sway Labour MP's to mount a challenge against Blair's policy.

Other Labour MPs rallied behind Dr Blix. Neil Gerrard, a Labour MP who tabled a Commons motion signed by more than 20 Labour colleagues warning the Trident replacement would breach the terms of the NPT, said Dr Blix would strengthen opposition.

"Dr Blix was proved right on WMD and a lot of people will agree with what he is saying now," he said. "It is possible that Mr Blair will lose a majority of Labour MPs on this issue."

The ending of the Cold War has changed the argument in the Labour Party. It is no longer a simple divide between those favouring multilateral disarmament and those supporting unilateral disarmament. Dr Blix's speech will increase the doubts among those who question the value of a more powerful nuclear weapon with multiple warheads designed to penetrate "hardened" targets, when the foreseeable threat is from rogue states or terrorists.

That is what I most object to. Even leaving aside the moral argument against keeping a nuclear deterrent, it simply makes no economic sense, nor is it sensible from a security perspective.

The Cold War is over. The new enemy is not one that can be fought with such weapons. And, indeed, even if we retain this weaponry, we do not have the power to unilaterally decide to use it.

It's a ridiculous vanity.

A far better course would be to strike for the high moral ground and declare that we were disarming. This would give us considerable weight when we approached other nations demanding that they, too, disarm.

The days when the west could proclaim who was civilised enough to possess such weaponry and who was not are, thankfully, over.

It is time for Blair to adjust to that new political reality. And that means honouring the same agreements that we demand others should honour.

Click title for full article.

tag: Blair, Blixnon-proliferation Treaty, North, Korea, tests, bomb, containment, policy, Iran