AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE,
London: Britain's defence secretary on Thursday backed finance minister Gordon and critics raged after he insisted the country would remain a nuclear power if, as expected, he becomes prime minister.
Defence Secretary Des Browne said the Chancellor of the Exchequer's commitment was “entirely consistent” with the government's manifesto.
But that did not stop Brown sparking a storm by confirming Wednesday that he wants to keep Britain's nuclear deterrent, with a decision on replacing the current arsenal likely to be taken before 2010.
In a speech to the movers and shakers of London's financial district, Brown said he was in favour of spending billions of pounds (dollars, euros) on a new generation of weapons to keep Britain in the global nuclear club.
“In an insecure world we must and will always have the strength to take all necessary long-term decisions for stability and security,” said Brown, who is almost certain to succeed Prime Minister Tony Blair as leader of the governing centre-left Labour Party within the next few years.
In a speech that dwelled mainly on economic stability, Brown said Britain would remain “strong in defence, in fighting terrorism, upholding NATO, supporting our armed forces at home and abroad — and retaining our independent nuclear deterrent”.
Political analysts said the almost passing remark signalled that Brown was committed to Britain retaining a long-term nuclear defence capability.
Defence Secretary Brown told BBC radio: “What he said is entirely consistent with what is in the manifesto and it's entirely consistent with what the prime minister has said.
“The fact that the chancellor is speaking about it in the context of a range of other policy issues is an indication of how transparent we are about this.”
Britain's current nuclear deterrent was set up in the 1980s by then prime minister Margaret Thatcher, when the Soviet Union — not global terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda — was seen as the primary threat.
It is based on four Royal Navy submarines fitted with US-built Trident missiles which are due to become obsolete in the 2020s. One of the submarines is always on patrol but the missiles are no longer pre-targeted.
Replacing the deterrent is likely to cost anywhere from 10 billion to 25 billion pounds (14.6 billion to 36.4 billion euros, 18.6 billion to 46.1 billion dollars), observers say.
Members of Parliament are keen for a vote on the issue, but Blair would only commit the government Wednesday to holding the “fullest possible debate” on Trident's future.
Critics say that by keeping its deterrent, Britain would be flaunting a commitment under the global nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty to move towards nuclear disarmament. They also point out that nuclear missiles are near-useless in fighting terrorist cells.
Leading Labour left-winger Alan Simpson accused Brown of launching “a pre-emptive strike on parliamentary democracy”, telling the BBC it was “bizarre” that he should announce his plans to business chiefs before MPs had debated the matter.
The chairwoman of the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, Kate Hudson, said that if the deterrent was renewed, it would “only contribute to global tensions and lead other countries to conclude that they also need to develop nuclear weapons”.
Liam Fox, the defence spokesman of the main opposition Conservative Party, dismissed Brown's remarks as “just more spin” designed to cast Blair's heir-apparent as a “statesman”.
Blair, whose Labour Party is suffering its lowest ratings in public opinion polls in two decades, is widely expected to step down as prime minister some time during the current parliamentary term, making way for Brown.
