Just a thought on defence

Politics
1

Is the French nuclear deterrent independent?….

Yes, the French nuclear deterrent is considered fully independent, developed and maintained entirely by France without reliance on other nations like the U.S. or NATO for design, components, or operational control, although France is exploring greater coordination with the UK and discussing an extended “European” role for its deterrent. This independence stems from France’s historical focus on national sovereignty, with the President having sole authority over its use, but recent strategic shifts involve discussions about its potential role in broader European defence.

:slightly_smiling_face:

Is the UK nuclear deterrent independent?….

Yes, the UK’s nuclear deterrent is considered operationally independent, meaning only the UK Prime Minister can authorize its use, using UK codes and equipment, but it has deep technical and logistical reliance on the United States, particularly for submarines, missiles (Trident II D5), and warhead components under the Mutual Defence Agreement. While theTrident system provides the UK with sovereign command and control, its components are intertwined with US technology, creating a unique “independent but interdependent” status.

So that’s a no then :scream: as we’ve all known for decades. Plus now the bloody things don’t work.

The UK needs to accept the special relationship ain’t so special anymore. And that’s been true for decades too, unless you count the master and poodle relationship special.

BTW, I hope Oz is reconsidering AUKUS too.

5 Likes
2

At least it’s not dependent on the Chinese!

3

Chinese strategic weapons are only of concern if you live between China and the country they launch them at.

Temu ICBM anyone?

4

You get a bigger bang for your Yuan on Ali Express. :smiley:

4 Likes
5

French nuclear doctrine explained.

[https://youtube.com/shorts/JHr6g9oOiF0?si=DxMGYfYou_pUGB43]

6

You have to build it yourself first and then light the touch paper

7

You might be at odds with @Dr. MarkH on that point John. :wink:

1 Like
8

The US strategy of awarding contracts to t(e lowest cost supplier may well mean that some of the “US” components are made in a sweatshop in China :thinking:

9

Though there is US/French cooperation on matters related to nuclear weapons but neither are very transparent about what that extends to.

10

I’m sure there is John. Just I think any reliance on the US for anything should be regarded as a risk at the moment. The UK is far more exposed and I would say the cost of rectifying it would be astronomical and lengthy. Even £17m for a failed test launch isn’t loose change.

“The paper said the Trident II D5 missile was intended to be fired 3,700 miles (5,954 km) to a sea target off the west coast of Africa but veered towards the US.”

Maybe the crew had just used the “Plan B” launch sequence :face_with_hand_over_mouth:

2 Likes
11

I sense a James Patterson novel coming out soon called “The Trump Diversion” :smiley:

12

Yes, it’s quite fortunate that the DASO build includes the ability to destroy it :scream:

1 Like
13

Programmed for a blond wig as target presumably. :rofl:

2 Likes
14

It’d look lovely embedded in the new rose garden courtyard.

15

Given the present incumbent in the White House , it’s critical that all UK defence systems are isolated from the USA asap.

2 Likes
16

In my wholly uninformed opinion, I imagine that could take a couple of decades.

1 Like
17

Especially given that both the RAF and Fleet Air Arm are heavily invested in the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fighter jets.

A nice European Airbus A310 (ex-Thomas Cook) equipped with lasers would be so much more suitable and cost-effective. :wink:

18

I agree, with the same amount of knowledge :rofl:

The temptation will be to think the current chump will be gone soon, and the next one may be better.

I think the world has changed, and having independent deterrents is even more important.

19

It’s potentially possible that post Trump, the USA may revert to being a responsible and respectful ally, but can we in EUROPE take this chance?

EUROPE is closer to the USSR ( Russia) than the mainland USA so the consequences would effect us quicker than them.

1 Like
20

But, the current US government seems closer to Russia than to Europe.

There’s a good, well-balanced and well-informed discussion on a current crucial aspect of this issue (in english) on France24 this evening - can be viewed online at:-