Continuous Nuclear Deterrent

Is the ability to launch a strike against any target at any time the same thing as having a nuclear deterrent? No, it is not.

Currently, we have one Trident submarine on patrol somewhere in the world at all times. It is the expensive basis for our nuclear deterrent at the moment. But it needn't be. We could just as easily have periods where there were no subs out at sea and continue to have an effective deterrent. We wouldn't be able to strike any target at any time but, providing our subs' movements remained secret, our enemies would never know at what time we had subs at sea or at home. Furthermore, one submarine would always be ready to put to sea, so that at times of increased risk our deterrent would retain its ability to strike any target at any time.

This might seem flawed, and it is certainly open to the accusation that our opponents would simply wait until our subs were at port and then launch a nuclear attack. While that has some merit from a theoretical perspective, realistically it has none. At most there is a very slight risk of nuclear attack on the UK. And even then, the threat is from a small scale dirty bomb not some Cold War-era missile. Faced with this terrorist nuclear threat Trident would be of precisely no use anyway, as we'd have no-one to fire the thing at.

If you then consider that a British government is supremely unlikely to ever actually launch a nuclear strike - given that it's a wholly unethical thing to do and could escalate conflict into all-out nuclear war - then cutting back on the ability to launch at any target at any time is a very sensible, practical cost-cutting measure. It also has the benefit of signalling to the world that we are not a nuclear threat - it's not hard to feel uneasy when a country you don't trust has this capacity, and not everyone trusts us - while maintaining our nuclear deterrent and our 'prestige' as a nuclear power.

In the end, we wouldn't really be sunk if our enemies discovered our subs were all in port, because we'd always retain the ability to quickly put to sea. Most importantly, by not scrapping Trident outright and instead scaling it back slightly we can retain our nuclear capabilities so that if a new Cold War emerges we can rapidly return to a permanent any-target-any-time deterrent. The funds freed would also allow Liam Fox and the MoD to focus on the type of threat we face now, which is not nuclear but low-tech, low-intensity conflict in places like Afghanistan.