Disarmament Archives - Page 2 of 3

Conflict Zone Korea 2: Recent Developments

Nov 092012

Aberdeen Voice presents the second of three articles by Jonathan Russell of Aberdeen and District Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) investigating the nuclear and military build up and tensions in Korea and the wider Asia/Pacific situation.

Jonathan will be giving a talk on this subject at 7.30pm on Monday 12 November in the conference room on the top floor of Aberdeen’s Belmont Cinema.

The one Korean politician who has cut a positive figure in recent years is Kim Dae-Jung.

President of South Korea from 1998-2003, the introduction of his Sunshine Policy led to marked improvements in relations between North and South Korea.

In the period following Dae-Jung’s presidency, however, the historic lack of trust between the nations, a change in the South Korean government and lack of positive leadership, both internally and internationally, has seen the relationship deteriorate.

TIMELINE:

2002: North Korea decides to re-activate a nuclear reactor and expel international inspectors.

2006: President Bush names North Korea as part of the axis of evil. In October, North Korea states that, due to growing intimidation by the US, they will stage a nuclear test that month and a second in 2009.

2008: The situation worsens when South Korean president Lee Myunheg-Bak ends his predecessor’s Sunshine Policy.

2009: North Korea walks out of international talks aimed at ending its nuclear activity and announces it no longer considers itself bound by the terms of the 1953 truce.

2010: The south accuses the north of sinking one of its warships and cuts off all cross border trade. The accusation is strenuously denied and the north severs all ties with Seoul. The US then imposes tough sanctions on the north. During a trip to China in August, North Korea’s Kim Jung Il signals a willingness to accept foreign aid to help cope with major flood damage.

2012: South Korea hosts the second Nuclear Security summit. The gathering of 50 nations is attended by President Obama, who hosted the first summit in Washington in 2010. North Korea condemns the South’s hosting of the event as ‘an unpardonable crime’ and an ‘intolerable grave provocation’. During the summit, the south mobilises more than 40,000 police and an unidentified number of troops to guard against possible provocation by North Korea, terrorists or demonstrations by its own citizens.

The United States has 28,500 troops based in South Korea. As a direct result of US pressure and with massive American funding, South Korea is constructing a naval base on the island of Jeju to berth Aegis warships, 38 of which form part of the US missile defence system.

Named the Island of Peace by the late President Roo Moo Hyon, Jeju was the site of a massacre where more than 30,000 civilians were estimated to have been slaughtered by the South Korean army during a 1948 uprising.

The high biological diversity, unique volcanic typography and local culture of Jeju attract many tourists but building the base will be hugely detrimental to the environment (notably its coral reefs), threatening the livelihoods of local fisherman and many related jobs.

Located strategically in the Korean straits, the construction of a naval base would considerably increase the island’s potential to become a military target in the event of an armed conflict.

Many observers believe Jeju naval base will serve the sea-based component of the US ballistic missile force.

Actor and campaigner Robert Redford has stated:

‘’I am moved and impressed that residents near the coastline have been waging a fierce, non-violent struggle to stop the base. They’ve used their bodies to block bulldozers and cement trucks, sacrificed their personal freedom, been beaten and imprisoned and paid heavy fines… I think the least environmentalists, peace activists and supporters of democracy can do is express our outrage.’’

In September, the International Union of Conservation of Nature (IUCN) held its World Conservation Congress with some 8,000 attendees on Jeju, throwing the spotlight on the bitter battle over the island’s future.

Missile defence systems on Aegis destroyers are currently being tested at the Pentagon’s testing facility on Hawaiian island Kavai. There is a potential danger of Japan, South Korea and Taiwan going nuclear or having US nuclear bases.

In February, there was good news following talks in Beijing between North Korea and the US, the former agreeing to halt uranium enrichment and the testing of long range missiles in return for food aid.

This agreement foundered on North Korea’s plan to launch a long range missile in honour of the hundredth anniversary of their leader Kim Il-Sung.

South Korea uses extensive nuclear power and produces plutonium

While the Koreans claim the launch was linked to the peaceful advance of their space programme, critics suspect it was connected to their nuclear ambitions. Both South Korea and Japan threatened to shoot the missile down if it entered their territory. In reality, however, the launch failed.

The failed ballistic missile launch by North Korea has been condemned by the UN Security Council, including China and Russia.

The unexpected re-election of the conservative Saenuri party in South Korea has complicated matters. As the Saenuri and North Koreans traditionally hate each other, the party is not interested in improving relations and tensions have increased.

South Korea uses extensive nuclear power and produces plutonium. If its nuclear plants were targeted in a conflict, extensive devastation would follow with possibly catastrophic consequences worldwide.

While it has not yet developed a ballistic missile capable of carrying a nuclear warhead, it is likely North Korea has more than one enrichment plant. Though a failure, the recent attempted missile launch suggests North Korea is well on its way to developing such a weapon.

Confused messages coming out of the country suggest an internal power struggle, that some elements want better relations with the West in return for food aid while others seek a more militant stance.

Meanwhile, China has been advocating calm in the area. North Korea’s most important ally, biggest trading partner and main source of food, arms and fuel, China has its own internal conflicts between its role as an emerging global player and its commitment to its North Korean allies.

The first six-nation talks since 2008 between North and South Korea, China, Japan, Russia and the US were due to restart in September. Russia allocated one of their top deputies to the talks, showing they are taking the situation seriously. While it seems some informal contacts did take place, these turned into an exchange of insults rather than any constructive dialogue or agreement.

Heads need to be knocked together by Russia and China re the North and the US re the South to make these talks happen and work. The alternative is ever escalating tension leading potentially to military and even nuclear warfare.

0n 23 October, South Korea announced a new deal with the US allowing it to develop ballistic missiles capable of striking targets anywhere in North Korea, missiles with larger warheads than had previously been in operation. North Korea responded by claiming it had missiles capable of reaching the US mainland.

A frequent complaint made by North Korea is that South Korea is a puppet regime of the US, which wants it to invade the north. This leads to North Korea pursuing its military First, Second and Third policies, meaning other aspects of society are neglected. This surely is not the way forward for either of the Koreas or the wider Asia Pacific area.

Next week Jonathan Russell will be writing about the wider Asia/Pacific political context taking in developments in China, the US, Japan, other Asian countries, Australia and Korea.

Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Conflict Zone Korea 1: Historical Background

History, Information No Responses »

Oct 312012

As tension mounts on the Korean Peninsula, Jonathan Russell of Aberdeen and District Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) provides background to the conflict. Jonathan also examines its potential for leading to a nuclear and conventional arms build up between the United States and China and to a much wider conflict.

This is one of a series of articles being produced for Aberdeen Voice by Aberdeen and District CND.

Jonathan Russell will give a talk on the Korean conflict at the meeting of Aberdeen and District CND on Monday 12th November.

Aberdeen CND have meetings on the second Monday of each month at 7.30pm on the top floor of the Belmont Cinema, Belmont Street, Aberdeen. You are more than welcome to come along.

This week’s article gives some historical background to the present tensions.

It will be followed after the talk on Monday 12th by two subsequent articles in Aberdeen Voice on Korea specifically and the wider Asia/Pacific area.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO KOREAN CONFLICT

North and South Korea are two very different states situated on the Korean peninsula, an area similar in size to that of the UK, lying between China and Russia to the North and Japan to the South-East. Japan occupied Korea from 1905 until 1945 and has a brutal history in the region.

In 1910 the Treaty of Annexation turned Korea into a fully fledged Japanese colony. This heralded a period of oppressive colonial rule. The Japanese aim was to modernise Korea and they built roads, railways, and waterways . They also eradicated nostalgia and hundreds of uniquely Korean buildings were destroyed.

The Korean Communist party was formed in 1925 and it became involved in guerrilla wars with other Korean groupings against the Japanese. The Western world turned a blind eye and only Christian missionaries raised concerns. By 1948 the Japanese language was made compulsory. During the Second World War conscription took place into Korean mines and Korean and Japanese factories. Thousands of Korean leaders from schools, churches and newspapers were thrown into jail.

With the surrender of Japan in 1945, the United Nations developed plans for a trusteeship administration, the Soviet Union administering the peninsula north of the 38th parallel and the United States administering the south.

This was done as a hasty expedient based on no more than a National Geographical map. After 40 years of Japanese oppression Korea was not prepared for the collapse and withdrawal of the Japanese in August 1948. On the 8th September 1948 Soviet troops moved into the North and United States troops into the south.

Initially the Korean Workers Party tried to establish a Government. The Russians backed a people’s committee in the North originally headed by a Christian nationalist Cho Mansik. However Stalin came to favour a communist resistance fighter called Kim ill Sung whose ‘dynasty’ the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea still remains in power.

This led to a horrendous three year war resulting in the estimated deaths of 2.5 million combatants and civilians.

The politics of the Cold War resulted in the 1948 establishment of two separate governments, North Korea (Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and South Korea(Republic of Korea). There was a major contradiction in this in that more communist party members were living in the South and more Christians in the North.

In October 1948 Synman Rhee a right wing nationalist returned to Korea in a plane arranged by General Macarthur. Following elections Synman Rhee took over the Presidency of the South. Soon after this there was what was known as the autumn uprising which was brutally put down. In Jeju island at the bottom of Korea 160 villages were destroyed on the orders to Rhee by the United States and nearly a third of the population were killed. Soldiers of Rhee’s 14th regiment mutinied but they themselves were brutally put down.

Following a build-up in tensions the North Korean army – the Korean People’s Army -crossed the 38th parallel on 25th June 1950 in response to the massacre of communists in the South. This led to a horrendous three year war resulting in the estimated deaths of 2.5 million combatants and civilians.

The Soviet Union under Stalin supported the North and had given the go-ahead for the People’s Army to cross the 38th parallel. Following a UN resolution sponsored by the United States, the United States and twenty other countries, including the United Kingdom, supported the South. The Russians supported the North with military equipment and aid but due to fear of a Third World War never directly became militarily involved.

Initially the North nearly captured the whole of the South but following a counter offensive led by General Macarthur the reverse was achieved.

The leadership of the newly declared People’s Republic of China under Mao also supported the North but was initially reluctant to get involved as they were both recovering from and consolidating power following their own civil war. However when United States and its allies nearly reached the Chinese border they entered the war with an estimated 340,000 troops.

The war was part civil war but primarily it was a struggle between the Communists and the Western allies.

The United States dropped more bombs during the conflict than they had in the Second World War and used napalm in greater levels than they did in Vietnam.

Both sides committed appalling atrocities against soldiers, civilians, and prisoners of war.

The use of child soldiers became a common occurrence on both sides.

After Stalin’s death the Soviet Council of Ministers ordered Mao and Kim to seek peace. The ending of the war (it has never been officially declared- a truce still remains) led to no change in that the pre-war border remained un-altered along the 38th parallel.

Without doubt the entire Korean people were the losers and the area has remained one of high tension. Korea has not been affected by ethnic tensions as in other parts of the world following the war but by ongoing ideological tensions.

Since 1948 the Korean peninsula has been divided between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in the North (23million people) and the Republic of Korea in the South (48.25 million people) the mountainous north has more mineral resources and the south richer agricultural land.

In the early days the northern Democratic People’s Republic of Korea was a communist success story but over time in particular after the fall of the Soviet Union it rapidly declined. Kim IL Sung its leader from the inception had close links with Stalin and in similar vein was involved in purges to get rid of his opposition.

Following Stalin’s death Kim IL Sung developed his totalitarian system called ‘juche’ a kind of Confucian Socialism which demanded that all activity would be beholden to the state. Emphasis went onto industrialisation to the neglect of agriculture and following the collapse of the Soviet empire this led for many to starvation.

In 1999 the North admitted to 220,000 deaths from famine though outside commentators have suggested the figure of 600,000.

There has been some improvement in North Korea since with China recently putting £3 billion into the economy but there is no doubt that the citizens of North Korea are much poorer than those in the South and vulnerable to shortages of food. The Kim IL Sung dynasty with its military 1st, 2nd and 3rd policy which is a huge drain in its overall resources is still in place with the young Kim IL Sung the third having just taken over the reins of power.

The people are poor and even the army are mostly involved as peasants on the land. Amnesty International in the United States has satellite images of political camps in North Korea where they estimate there are 200.000 people held in horrendous conditions.

The North Korean government are adamant that the camps do not exist. In the Korean situation even more than others it is difficult to distinguish between propaganda and truth from either side. If the camps to exist in the form suggested they are truly horrific.

There was another form of totalitarianism in the South under their leader Syngman Rhee’s autocratic and corrupt government and most of the governments and military governments that followed. The South had their National Security Law which allowed clamp downs on opposition.

In present day South Korea Amnesty International, report, that the South Korean Government are increasingly invoking their national security law. This restricts freedom of expression particularly in the context of discussions pertaining to North Korea. In March the UN Human Rights Commission considered the cases of 100 South Koreans.

Initially it was South Korea’s economy which did not work well with an over reliance on foreign aid from the United States and North Korea was seen as a communist success. However over recent years South Korea has become one of South East Asia’s booming economies with standards of living rising but with marked disparities in wealth.

According to a speaker on BBC’s Women’s Hour from Nottingham university who has spent a number of years in North and South of Korea, those defecting from the North find it difficult to adapting to the hierarchical style of businesses in South Korea. Korea is indeed a place of many contradictions and working out what is true and what is propaganda is complex.

For a much more detailed history of Korea an excellent book ‘Everlasting Flower a History of Korea’ is available in Aberdeen’s Central Library. Information is also available on the Internet.

Next week I will be writing more on the present situation and the third and final article which will be published following my talk will look at Korean conflict and the wider military build up and potential for conflict in the wider Asia/Pacific area.

Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Conflict Zone Korea: Talk And Discussion, Monday Nov 12

Articles No Responses »

Oct 312012

Talk & discussion: Conflict Zone Korea

As tension mounts on the Korean Peninsula Jonathan Russell, chair of Aberdeen & District CND, provides background to the conflict in Korea and its potential for leading to a nuclear and conventional arms build-up between the United States and China/Russia.

Time and Date: 7:30pm, Monday, 12th Nov

Venue: the seminar room, top floor, the Belmont Cinema, Belmont St.

Everybody Welcome!

http://www.cnduk.org/

http://www.banthebomb.org/

For more details contact: Jonathan on 07582-456-233

Bruce Kent Speaks To Aberdeen

Aberdeen City, Featured, Information 1 Response »

Oct 182012

Veteran peace campaigner Bruce Kent says it is time for Scotland to get rid of its Trident Nuclear Weapons. With thanks to Jonathan Russell.

The United Kingdom’s leading peace activist, spoke at a public meeting in Aberdeen on October 3rd as part of a speaking tour of the East Coast of Scotland taking in Inverness, Aberdeen, Brechin and Dundee.

Bruce outlined his opposition to both Nuclear Weapons and warfare in general, and started by questioning the way the world is presently dealing with conflict.

He told the audience that he lives in a part of London that has a wide variety of ethnic groups and said that, while there are challenges between different people and ethnic groups, people manage to get by with each other without having to take a shotgun to their neighbours.

This he contrasted with present conflicts where the leaders of the world choose to deal with these disputes by military means rather than by mediation and noted that we can see the results of this in conflicts in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and, presently, in Syria. He suggested that, when investigated, pretexts for military invasion are usually found to have no truth to them.

Bruce argued that we need to start honouring peace makers and peace keepers rather than the politicians and generals who cause havoc around the world. The acceptance and glorification of violence in our society needs to be changed to a culture which encourages peace, and the fact that it is found acceptable for business to create and sell arms and Nuclear Weapons has to end.

Treaties have been signed to stop chemical weapons and land mines and the same could be true for arms and nuclear weapons. People are suffering across the world as a result of conflict, something which the aid agencies and people in general need to speak out about more powerfully.

Bruce outlined the horrific nature of the 19,500 nuclear weapons which still exist on our planet. These weapons are sure to be used at some point as world leaders have only minutes to decide whether to use them and incorrect, or faulty, information linked to the fallibility of our political leaders, could lead to the destruction of our planet.

Scotland, he feels, presently has a unique opportunity with independence to get rid of Trident Nuclear weapons and while he does not back any political party, he noted that the majority of Scottish politicians and 75% of the population are against the Trident weapons which are housed here for the UK Government.

Getting rid of Trident from Scotland would, he said, make it impossible for the rest of the UK to house its nuclear weapons and would set the right example to the rest of the world.

At 83, Bruce Kent is still active and sets an example to us all. He has been a prominent figure in the peace movement for over 40 years and is presently Vice President of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament and Vice-Chair of the Movement for the Abolition of War.

Comments enabled – see comments box below. Note, all comments will be moderated.

Waging Peace Against War

Aberdeen City, Events, Information No Responses »

Sep 242012

With thanks to Jonathan Russell.

Bruce Kent, Britain’s most well known peace campaigner, will be speaking at meetings on the East Coast of Scotland in early October. Meetings will be taking place in Inverness, Aberdeen, Brechin, and Dundee.

The meeting in Aberdeen is being organised by Aberdeen Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament. It will be held in Room 10, New Kings at the University of Aberdeen on Tuesday October 3rd at 7.30pm

Described by David Blair in the Daily Telegraph as ‘The most principled and consistent figure in public life’, at 83 Bruce Kent is still one of the most radical people in British politics.

He recently supported the Occupy movement and has been Britain’s most long standing opponent of Nuclear Weapons and war in general.

At a time when the world is sliding into ever more warfare, and the UK government are intent on renewing our deadly Trident nuclear weapon system, Bruce’s voice is one which urgently needs to be heard.

All welcome to attend.

Bruce Kent Speaking at Anti- Trident meeting

Bruce Kent at Faslane in Scotland the United Kingdom’s Nuclear Base

Hiroshima/Nagasaki Memorial Ceremony 2012

Aberdeen City, History, Information No Responses »

Aug 032012

With thanks to Aberdeen CND Chair Jonathan Russell.

Monday 6th August sees the 67th anniversary of the first ever explosion of a nuclear weapon, when the United States dropped a nuclear bomb on the Japanese city of Hiroshima.

This was followed on the 9th August by the explosion of a nuclear bomb on the city of Nagasaki.

200 peace lanterns will be released on the river Dee to commemorate the 200,000 men, women and children who died following the nuclear explosions at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Many more died later from injuries or prematurely from the horrendous health effects that followed. The memorial event will start with poetry, song and speeches from politicians, students and faith groups.

The event will take place on Monday 6th August at 8.30pm until 10pm by the side of the River Dee at the Fishermans hut off Riverside Drive (between the Bridge of Dee and Duthie Park).

All members of the public are welcome to attend.

For most of us nuclear weapons have been a part of the world we have always lived in. We can often put into the back of our minds how horrific these weapons would be if used. But whether or not to build a new nuclear weapons system in the UK is still an issue of debate.

Worldwide, nearly 50% of these weapons have been destroyed. Ukraine, Belarus and Kazakhstan have become nuclear free. South Africa has unilaterally got rid of its Nuclear Weapons. Argentina and Brazil stopped their Nuclear Programmes in the 1980’s and South America has a treaty which forbids the development of Nuclear weapons, as do the Scandinavian countries.

However, there are still 19,500 Nuclear Weapons in the world – enough to destroy our world several times over. The UK Government currently plans to build new nuclear weapons by restoring the Trident system.

For further information Please Contact Jonathan Russell Chair Aberdeen CND mobile 07582456233 e-mail jhamiltonrussell@hotmail.co.uk

Hiroshima/Nagasaki Memorial Day – Mon 6th August 2012

Aberdeen City, Events, Featured, News No Responses »

Jul 262012

With Thanks to Jonathan Russell and Aberdeen CND.

Aberdeen CND invites you to mark the 67th anniversary of the first use of nuclear weapons.

In August 1945 the US dropped 2 atomic bombs on the Japanese cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

We will release 200 peace lanterns on the River Dee to commemorate the 200,000 men, women and children who died.

There will also be short contributions from persons representing Student organisations, Trade Unions, Faith Groups and Civic leaders.

Date: Monday 6th August 2011, at 8.30pm
Venue: the Fisherman’s Hut on the River Dee
(by Riverside drive – See map)

CND campaigns to stop any future mass destructions! We call on the Government to:

Scrap the Trident nuclear system.
Cancel plans for the next generation nuclear weapons
Work for international nuclear disarmament

For further details contact: www.banthebomb.org/AbCND or telephone Jonathan on 07582-456-233

The Economics Of Trident: Part 2

Aberdeen City, Information No Responses »

Jun 142012

This is the second article produced by Aberdeen and District CND on the economics of the UK nuclear deterrent system Trident. This article relates to the economics of the Scottish situation last week’s article looked at the wider UK. We would recommend that you read both articles. With Thanks to Jonathan Russell.

The STUC/CND report of 2007 demonstrated the inaccuracy of claims that upwards of 11,000 jobs would be lost to Scotland if Trident was not replaced. It found that the loss of Jobs would be (only) 1,800.
In a recent article in the Scottish CND Magazine John Ainslie has said that there are less than 500 civilian jobs in Faslane and Coulport which are directly involved in supporting the Trident weapon system.

To put this in perspective, up until 2007 over 40, 00 Scottish Defence related jobs had been shed since 1990 without significant government intervention to ensure alternative employment.

At 2007 prices, of the then £1 billion annual procurement costs of Trident replacement, the annual cost to Scotland would have been £238 million,
Combined costs of £85 million annual procurement, with £153 million a year share of existing and continuing costs of Trident.

A debate and vote on Trident took place in the Scottish Parliament in June 2007. In this debate the Scottish Parliament voted conclusively against the renewal of Trident, demonstrating the clear opposition of the Scottish people to the UK government’s course of action. Following on from this, the Scottish Government set up a working group on Scotland without Nuclear weapons.

The working party had the following to say on the economic effects of not renewing Trident.

“The UK government has made significant investment over the years in upgrading the facilities at HMNB Clyde, including £300 million in the past two years and has announced that HMNB Clyde can have a continuing role as a strategic naval facility for conventionally armed naval forces, to take advantage of significant assets already in place and the UK governments maritime change programme offers the opportunity in the long run for stability of employment, without nuclear weapons at HMNB Clyde.”

The effect of expenditure on Trident replacement on Scottish budgets, in the context of future Comprehensive Spending Reviews, will have a negative impact on public expenditure in Scotland with a corresponding effect on jobs: the STUC/CND investigation estimated that replacing Trident could cost Scotland 3,000 jobs.

The working group considered that a planned programme of defence diversion adequately resourced, could ensure that an equivalent or greater number of jobs can be created in the local economy.

The more recent BASIC commission report by Professor Keith Hartley points out that though Glasgow is an area of high unemployment it is part of the wider Clyde economy where there are alternative job prospects. Staff and facilities are in the main transferrable however some staff and facilities are so highly specialised that they can only be used for submarine work.

Global climate change is emerging as a major future security challenge

Aberdeen has 12 firms that would be affected by the replacement of Trident. With an average spend of just under two million on each firm involved in Scotland this would affect the Aberdeen economy.

Government would require appropriate policies to adjust to these changes. It must be remembered that spending in other ways would lead to more jobs .

Choices have to be made about what it is best to spend public money on.

For many the cry would be that money is better spent on saving some of our health, education and welfare services from at least some of the cuts that are planned;
Others would say that these finances would be better spent on keeping our conventional military resources
Others would say our spending should go on overseas aid.
Other Capital expenditure in transport, green technology or housing infrastructure would be a far more effective way of invigorating the economy than spending our increasingly reduced public spending on nuclear weapons.

Of course firms like BAE systems and Babcock’s would argue differently. We would argue that this money, however it is spent; it should not be on the renewal of Trident. Further the priority should not be on military spending unless aimed at developing our role in peace keeping.

On another front we would question our priorities; Global climate change is emerging as a major future security challenge.

Expenditure on nuclear weapons could consume resources that might otherwise be used in the fight against climate change;
Climate change is one of the drivers which will influence the long term affordability of nuclear weapons.
If we re-invest the money that is to be spent on Trident we could make the UK/SCOTLAND a worldwide leader in wave and tidal power technology and create hundreds of jobs, more than compensating for the jobs lost by cancelling Trident.
This in turn would help re-build our economy, which in turn, would help protect our public services. A win-win-win solution!

The credit crunch and global economic meltdown has compounded pressure on the affordability of Britain’s Nuclear weapons.

The time is ripe to stop the replacement of Trident and it would be one significant step in getting rid of Nuclear Weapons worldwide; it could further help us start concentrating on the real problems we face, both at a UK/SCOTTISH and world level.

Aberdeen and District CND have monthly meetings at 7.30pm on the second Monday of each month held on the top floor of the Belmont Cinema, Belmont Street, Aberdeen.
http://banthebomb.org/AbCND/index.php/CND

The Economics Of Trident

Aberdeen City, Information No Responses »

Jun 072012

This week we examine the UKdimension of the Economics of the UK’s nuclear deterrent Trident, and next week we will look at Scottish dimension. This is one of a series of articles being produced by Aberdeen and District Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). You can read further articles in both past and future editions of Aberdeen Voice. With thanks to Jonathan Russell.

Given the global recession and the United Kingdom’s huge debt crisis, a major area of concern is whether, in a time of massive cuts, Trident should be a priority of our public spending.
The estimated lifetime cost of more than £80 billion to replace Trident will have a significant effect on other public spending and, if the experience of such replacements replicates what has happened in the United States, costs could be more than double that amount.

A recent BASIC Trident Commission report has stated that the non-replacement of Trident could produce substantial cost savings of up to £83.5 billion over the period 2016 – 2062.

The Ministry of Defence faces cuts of up to £74 billion over the next ten years and a £36 billion deficit on projected capital programmes. On top of this, there will be a bill exceeding £20 billion for the capital costs of Trident replacement over, more or less, the same period.

In April, 2010, under the heading The UK does not need a nuclear deterrent, Lord Bramall, the former Chief of Defence Field Marshall, challenged the wisdom of replacing Trident in the following letter to the Times:

“It is of deep concern that the question of Trident replacement is at present excluded from this process (the Strategic Defence Review). With an estimated cost of more than £80 billion, replacing Trident will be one of the most expensive programmes that this country has seen. Going ahead will clearly have long-term consequences for the military and defence equipment budget that needs to be carefully examined.

“Given the present economic environment in which the defence budget faces the prospect of worrying cuts and that we have already an estimated hole in the defence equipment budget of some £35 billion, it is crucial that a review is fully costed.”

He also added that the option of nuclear disarmament needs to be carefully evaluated as:

both the running costs and the disposal of nuclear waste costs are often ignored when discussions take place about the costs of replacing Trident
the £20 billion capital costs were a considerable underestimate and
the running costs went up from £1 billion in 2006 to £3.1 billion in 2010.

The £80 billion cited by Lord Bramall included the running costs of the present and successive programmes and the disposal costs of nuclear waste.

UK CND point out that £3.1 billion a year would pay for approximately 31,000 houses and create employment directly in construction and through the supply chain, for 62,000 people. Given the UK housing shortage, this would be a win-win situation resulting in both growth in the economy and the provision of much needed social housing.

The vulnerability of employment loss UK wide would be most acute in Barrow-in-Furness and, to a lesser extent in Aldermaston and Burchfield.
Professor Keith Hartley, in the recent BASIC report, analyses the impacts arising from possible options and concludes that, if the government decided to cancel the Trident programme, the UK would be looking at job losses of around 9,200 after 2025 and the loss of 21,700 jobs in 2052.

The latter losses are linked to Astute-class submarines and would allow plenty of time for future governments to intervene in particular exposed local economies like Barrow on Furness. It should also be remembered that submarine manufacture is particularly capital intensive, so more alternative jobs could be created with the same investment.

Trident is there for defence purposes – it is not the best means of creating employment – and, unlike other UK defence industries, it provides no obvious long term benefits in the form of exports, or extensive technology spin-offs to other products or to the rest of the economy.

Job losses should also be put in proportion: between 1990 and 1995 employment in the Barrow shipyards fell from 14,250 to 5,800, a much greater figure than the possible job losses if Trident was cancelled. The state of the economy and labour markets, including local labour markets at the time, would also affect the economic impact of the cancellation of Trident

In line with the TUC’s 2009 support for Just Transition towards a fuel-efficient green economy, government funded programmes, such as those operated in the United States under the Base Realignment Closure programme, should be adopted now.

The scientific, design and technical skills concentrated in Barrow were identified by the International Energy Agency as having the potential to be used for the development of new technological niches in the efficient production of marine and sub-sea energy.

Next week’s article will deal with the Scottish dimension of the Economics of the UK’S nuclear deterrent Trident

Aberdeen and District CND hold meetings at 7.30pm on the second Monday of each month on the top floor of the Belmont Cinema, Belmont Street Aberdeen

Nuclear Power Accidents And Depleted Uranium

Aberdeen City, Information No Responses »

May 312012

This is one of a series of articles being produced by Aberdeen and District Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND). You can read further articles in both past and future editions of Aberdeen Voice. With thanks to Jonathan Russell.

Even a nuclear power plant that suffers accidental damage has dire long-term consequences, for instance those following Fukushima’s nuclear disaster and although the first reports suggested that harvests contained levels of contamination well under the safety limit for human consumption:

more recent research by the Universities Space Research association in the US State of Maryland has found that the area of eastern Fukushima had levels that exceeded official government limits for arable land and

researchers estimated that cesium-137 (the longest lasting contaminant) found close to the nuclear plant was eight times the safety limit, while neighbouring regions were just under this level.

Much more worryingly, there is a daily struggle to keep 1,500 rods cool which, otherwise, would release huge amounts of radiation into the atmosphere.

If hit by another similar earthquake, the US National Council on radiation protection, along with Japanese experts, have stated that if there were another earthquake, there is a 70% chance that the entire fuel pool structure would collapse, leading to a disaster that would release 134 curies of cesium -137 – roughly 85 times the amount released at Chernobyl.

These experts believe this would destroy the world environment and our civilization, which has led to Japan decommissioning its entire nuclear program and move to Green Energy. In Germany, the public outcry has led them to stop building nuclear power stations and engage in a programme of closing down existing ones and moving even more to Green Technology.

We have yet to find out the long term effects of the depleted Uranium

Of course Nuclear Technology has improved since the building of the Fukushima Dai-Ichi nuclear power plant and neither Scotland, nor the United Kingdom, is likely to be affected by an earth quake the size of the one in Japan.

Nuclear power stations have to take this possibility into account in their design (the Health and Safety Executive did note two problems with seismic design at the Heysham and Torness nuclear power plants).

Fukushima has highlighted the extremely scary potential for disaster if we go down the nuclear route as many risks, such as human error and terrorist attacks, would still exist. Also some nuclear power stations, such as Torness, are located near to the sea and the rise in sea levels could lead to flooding.

The present Scottish government is committed to closing down our nuclear power stations while, in contrast, the UK government is planning to build nuclear power stations, although German firms which would have been involved have pulled out.

c1070d3e-7508-401b-b306-05e9f2655df3_500

We have yet to find out the long term effects of the depleted Uranium used by Western forces and NATO in recent conflicts from Iraq, to Afghanistan, to Libya.

What we do know is that death rates and serious malformations of many babies have already greatly increased as a result of the use of depleted uranium in our Western weaponry. But what might happen in the case of unavoidable accidental damage, or terrorist action and what might survivors then regret?

Aberdeen and District CND have meetings each month at 7.30pm on the top floor of the Belmont Cinema Belmont Street Aberdeen

Older Entries Newer Entries

CND campaigns to stop any future mass destructions! We call on the Government to:

Scrap the Trident nuclear system.

Cancel plans for the next generation nuclear weapons

Work for international nuclear disarmament