Dr Hans Blix has urged Tony Blair to reconsider the UK’s future commitment to Trident nuclear weapons.
The chairman of The Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission believes
that they are not necessary, that they have had their day, that we should be “walking away from it”.
I spoke to him at the end of a conference in Cambridge debating freedom of information, the use of political spin and, of course, that dodgy dossier and WMD. It was riveting stuff, but I was more interested in where the future lay.
We chatted afterwards over a glass of bubbly, Dr Blix is so incredibly affable and good humoured. He believes America is firmly entrenched in Iraq and will not withdraw its troops in the near future for fear of losing face, Bush will not want to appear the loser in the run up to the next presidential election in two years time, which makes good sense to me, though not a reason to be at war, he should be challenged about this motive.
But back to Trident and the future of WMDs. The peace loving Dr Blix and his Commission firmly believe we should be reducing our nuclear, biological and chemical weapons, South Africa is the only country to have walked away from them.
He believes we have “stagnated” regarding disarmament, and are rearming with Trident at a time when our warheads have almost halved from the peak of the cold war when they numbered 50,000 to 27,000 today. He said:
“I would like the UK to ask itself if they need them. I understand why Britain had nuclear weapons in the the first place, they were conventional weapons in those days. We are now working towards cooperation with Russia and Europe and detente, is it meaningful any more?”
Dr Blix’s recent WMD Commission report states that the world must aim at achieving a ban on both possession and use of nuclear weapons, in the same way as bans apply to biological and chemical weapons. All states – even the great powers – must prepare to live without nuclear weapons and other weapons of terror.
Which country will be the first to lay down its arms? Should we be supporting Trident or backing Dr Blix’s proposals? I would prefer a future without these weapons, but I would also like reassurance that this was happening globally. Is that a realistic expectation?
Update: 28 November 2006, The Independent runs the same story.
Update: 18 December 2006, The Bartlett Diaries linked to this post and has over 100 comments.
The question I ask is which country will be the first to have Nuclear weapons used against it this century. My short list is:
Israel (by Iran)
Iran (by Israel and/or the US)
Pakistan (by India)
India (by Pakistan)
The UK (by Iran / Al Q etc)
US ( by almost everyone – except France and the UK)
Japan (by North Korea)
North Korea (by the US)
What stops this from happening ? Its the thought of the retaliation from the victim.
South Africa is not threatened by nuclear menace – if they were then they would not have disarmed. Hans Blix may be disarming charming, but his deluded if he thinks disarmament will proceed to completion.
The answer is firmer defence, free trade and countries taking collective responsibility. Not another round of 1920’s style disarmament. ( The last time the UK dropped its guard the Falklands were invaded by a supposed Western country).
Cripes, why do need need 27,000 nuclear warheads? That could destroy life on earth!
Ellee,
Blix is a terror-appeasing dhimmi.
I heard Blix say this very thing today in Cambridge to an audience too- I thought he was the typical international lawyer strong on process and empiricism- he was right about Iraq’s weapons- but his weakness was the politics of the situation.
Gracchi, It is clear that Hans Blix doesn’t wear a political hat, his views are based on evidence, and the wish for disarmamanet. I think he has an excellent grasp of the political situation, but does not want to be compromised by Governments for their own ends.
[…] The Chairman of the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission, Dr Hans Blix, is reported on this blog as saying that we have “stagnatedâ€? regarding disarmament, and are rearming with Trident at a time when our warheads have almost halved from the peak of the cold war when they numbered 50,000 to 27,000 today. […]