London: Britain
planned a massive nuclear bomb-making factory for Aldermaston,
raising concern that UK is heading towards a new era of atomic
weapon production reported The Observer today here in London.
Proposed plant will be able to test, design and build a new
generation of nuclear bombs.
Arms experts believe it will focus on smaller atomic warheads for
use against terrorist groups and rogue states.
Planning details will be submitted to West Berkshire planning
authorities in the next 10 days reveal plans for one of the most
state-of-the-art nuclear weapons plants in Europe.
Described by environmentalists as one of the most momentous
decisions of Tony Blairs leadership, the plant will cost hundreds
of millions of pounds, despite being officially approved without
parliamentary debate, sparking fury among MPs.
Environment analysts warn that it appears to be a blatant breach
of Britains obligations under the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
William Peden, nuclear disarmament expert at Greenpeace, said:
We are talking a massive nuclear bomb-making factory. The plans -
the existence of which were confirmed by the Atomic Weapons
Establishment - will involve closure of the 270-acre Burghfield
site, where Britains atomic warheads have been produced for almost
50 years.
It will be replaced by a futuristic complex capable of designing
atomic weapons as well as storing existing Trident warheads at AWEs
700-acre headquarters.
Details of the proposals were discovered in AWEs annual report,
which refers to plans to transfer all operations from Burghfield
to the Aldermaston site.
The report also reveals proposals for a hydrodynamics research
facility to help design and develop nuclear weapons, a 15 million
supercomputer to simulate the effects of atomic devices and a
factory producing tritium, a substance used to maximise the effects
of a nuclear explosion.
An AWE spokesman said they had to maintain the capability to
design a successor to Trident, although the Government had not
asked it to start work on one.
Prof.
Paul Rogers, professor of peace studies at Bradford University,
said: But, at the very least, they want to build the infrastructure
to create a new generation of weapons.
It is clear that the Government is committing itself to a
long-term nuclear future after Trident.
This suggests a nuclear-free world more in theory than in
practice. Menzies Campbell , Liberal Democrat foreign affairs
spokesman, said Government policy remained unclear.
There has never been a serious parliamentary debate about a
Trident replacement or what form it should take, he added.
But before embarking on expenditure of this size on an issue of
such political controversy, at the very least Parliament ought to be
con sulted.
I even suspect that the Cabinet may not have been involved in the
decision.
There are also legitimate concerns about facilities like this
after 11 September. The planning application will be submitted by
the Ministry of Defence on behalf of AWE, which is responsible for
running Britains nuclear weapons sites.
The proposals must abide by normal planning procedures because
crown immunity was removed after AWE - in effect, private
contractors - took control of the running of Aldermaston in 1993.
Planning officers do not have the power to reject the plans but,
in the event of strong objection, can demand that Environment
Minister Michael Meacher examines them.
Labour MP Martin Salter - who claims that his Reading West
constituency lies downwind of Aldermaston - said: I am appalled
that plans have been drawn up to extend the nuclear weapons plant at
Aldermaston without reference to local communities, or indeed
Parliament. Tomorrow he will table a series of parliamentary
questions about the Governments long-term nuclear policies.
The revelation arrives amid allegations that the UK is keen to
pursue the Bush administrations lead in wanting to develop a range
of tactical nuclear devices that can be used pre-emptively against
terrorist groups or rogue states.
Recent Nuclear Posture Review Report from USA details the need
for an offensive nuclear deterrent and a revitalised nuclear
weapons complex with massive investment in facilities in order to
modernise its weapons production capability.
Analysists point to a series of statements from Defence Secretary
Geoff Hoon in which he insists Britain has a right to use nuclear
devices -pre-emptively if necessary - against states that are not
nuclear powers.
Rebecca Johnson, executive editor of Disarmament Diplomacy, a
leading independent journal in arms control, warned that US and UK
policy was becoming increasingly hand in glove.
Ian Davis, director of the British American Security Information
Council, an independent think-tank, said there was mounting evidence
of increased co-operation between Britain and the US on nuclear
policy.
Inquiries had found Labour becoming increasingly secretive over
nuclear policy and demanded greater parliamentary scrutiny over
future decisions.
Investigations by The Observer confirm increased activity between
US and UK weapons officials.
Parliamentary answers from defence ministers reveal the number of
UK defence personnel visiting the US has grown substantially.
Visits to the Nevada nuclear test site have risen from nine in
1999 to 40 last year with a further 182 meetings between both
countries.
There are now 16 joint working groups on weaponry issues,
including nuclear warhead physics, nuclear counter-terrorism
technology and nuclear weapon code development.
Peden said that the planned development mirrored the secrecy
surrounding the replacement of Polaris with Trident in the late
1970s.New facilities were then also sited at Aldermaston, but
construction was hampered by delays and escalating costs, which
eventually soared to 1.5 billion.
There has still been no official acknowledgment on the type of
warhead Trident carries.
An AWE spokesman said the current proposals depend on a number of
factors such as the results of a feasibility study.
They also have to be approved by regulators including the Nuclear
Installations Inspectorate.
If approved, construction of the new plant would be included
within the current 2.3bn 10-year contract.
He added that leaflets detailing the proposals would be released
to the public in two weeks time.
In these circumstances what signals the developing countries get
and what role IAEA will play in third world? How will we justify the
arms control and peace efforts.
| Post your Comments |
|
Views Expressed and
published here are not a property of The FrontierPost; however
FP reserves the right to edit any comments.
Messages/comments will be published here within 24 hours of
posting.
|
Send this Article to your friend
Printer-Friendly Version!!!
Post your
Comments 
