nuclear weapons

Trident replacement vote - Greenpeace comment

Last edited 18 July 2016 at 2:45pm
18 July, 2016

Commenting on today's parliamentary vote on whether or not to replace the Trident nuclear weapons system, Greenpeace UK Executive Director John Sauven said:

‘Replacing Trident is economically unjustifiable, strategically ill-conceived and morally reprehensible. To commit billions of pounds to replace a relic from the Cold War is not just a ludicrous folly, it’s also incredibly dangerous. If Britain declares that we need nuclear weapons for our security, then who are we to tell others not to do the same? We know where that road leads.

Trident Alternatives Review

Last edited 16 July 2013 at 2:19pm

Greenpeace Response

16 July, 2013

In response to the publication of the Trident Alternatives Review, Louise Edge, Disarmament Campaigner for Greenpeace UK, said –

“One hundred billion pounds could do a lot to address some of the real threats facing modern Britain – climate change, the recession, terrorism – but instead we’re throwing it away on a system designed for the threat of Soviet tanks entering West Germany. Nothing in the Alternatives Review changes the fact that Trident replacement will be a colossally expensive weapon targeted at the last century.”

Remembering the Warrior

Posted by hayley.baker — 10 July 2012 at 10:16am - Comments
The Rainbow Warrior sunk after being bombed by the French in 1985
All rights reserved. Credit: Brian Latham / Greenpeace
The Rainbow Warrior was bombed by the French secret service in 1985

Today is the 27th anniversary of the 1985 bombing of the Rainbow Warrior by French secret service agents here in Auckland harbour. That is a long time ago now, but every year at this time I am reminded in crystal clear detail of the day and the times, and of Fernando.

Iran nuclear crisis needs ‘disruptive diplomacy’, not shock and awe

Posted by Kumi Naidoo — 16 April 2012 at 5:33pm - Comments
All rights reserved. Credit: Greenpeace / John Novis
Rainbow Warrior sails 20 miles from the port of Bushehr, Iran. 2007

Kumi's blog was originally published by IPS, before the Istanbul summit took place.

Disruptive diplomacy may be the only way out of the Iran-Israel nuclear crisis, the only way to pierce the hegemony of hypocrisy dominating the power politics of nuclear weapons control, of those who have them, and of those who are accused of developing them.

Otherwise, this weekend's meeting on Iran's nuclear programme is likely to be yet another missed opportunity, yet another exercise in futility.

Does Trident announcement mark a new Lib Dem broken promise?

Posted by Louise Edge — 18 May 2011 at 4:32pm - Comments

A while back I got a letter from the Lib Dems telling me "Trident will not be renewed this parliament - not on a Liberal Democrat watch”.

This ran though my mind today as I watched Defence Secretary Liam Fox stand up in parliament to pronounce ‘thunderbirds are go’ on the next phase of building a replacement for Trident.

FOI documents reveal MoD plans to purchase "long lead" items for Trident

Last edited 18 May 2011 at 4:33pm
Publication date: 
18 May, 2011

A freedom of information request made by Greenpeace reveals that the MoD plans to purchase a whole series of “long lead” items for Trident replacement submarines in the next few years - estimated to cost billions.

Download the report:

MoD starts purchasing Trident replacement without parliamentary OK - get your MP to act!

Posted by andrelotz — 18 March 2011 at 3:22pm - Comments
While cuts are being made to public services, why is money being spent on weapon
All rights reserved. Credit: Greenpeace
While cuts are being made to public services, why is money being spent on weapons we neither want or need?

At the mention of nuclear today our thoughts turn to the situation in Japan and all of those affected by the earthquakes, tsunami and nuclear emergency. I can only hope that the situation at Fukushima is soon contained and the risks minimised for everyone affected.

Here in the UK, there is another nuclear issue that is silently inching forward without parliamentary approval or public awareness – nuclear weapons replacement.

While cuts are being made to public services, why is money being spent on weapon

Ahoy! A nuclear scandal ahead?

Posted by Louise Edge — 14 January 2011 at 6:09pm - Comments
All rights reserved. Credit: John Cobb / Greenpeace

Remember the defence review? The one that left us marvelling at the Alice in Wonderland world we inhabit - where we build two giant aircraft carriers we don’t actually want because building them is actually cheaper than cancelling them? The one that said we can’t actually afford to buy any planes to put on those carriers?

Moving to a nuclear weapons-free world

Last edited 12 November 2010 at 1:03pm

Today, nearly two decades after the Cold War ended, there are still 23,000 nuclear warheads in the world.

They are held by just nine countries: the US, Russia, Britain, France, China, Israel, India, Pakistan and North Korea. Worryingly, more than 2,000 of them are still on hair-trigger alert - ready to launch at short notice, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

But this is not the whole story. The majority of the world has already shown us the solution to the problem of nuclear weapons - by rejecting them. Many countries have gone down the nuclear weapons path then turned back, realising that they do not increase their security.

Follow Greenpeace UK