A similar substitution of the British nuclear deterrent to the latest — an impossible task for the real reasons, said the first deputy minister of England money Danny Alexander
Besides, this is not necessary, I’m sure the State Minister as is «reliable and solid alternative» today’s system, the base of which consists based submarine-launched ballistic missiles «Trident».
In an interview with the British newspaper «The Guardian», Alexander stressed that the State Treasury of the United Kingdom in the foreseeable future, are simply unable to provide for the construction of a new submarine fleet, sufficient to accommodate nuclear missiles in their current amount. This fact, he said, must recognize and come out of it when planning the modernization of the state «nuclear shield.»
«Given the monetary pressures that currently felt throughout the public sector, and all the challenges that the government needs to perform and pay, taking into account problems in other areas, I think financially unrealistic idea that we can somehow form a multi-billion dollar fund to pay for this change, «- said Alexander.
Nuclear fleet England — four class submarines «Vanguard» with missiles «Trident» on board — will spend their own technical resource to mid 2020s. Without replacing obsolete submarines to equal or a bit fewest new — class «Saksessor» — United Kingdom 20 years could lose their own «nuclear shield» unless abandon sea-based ballistic missiles. Today’s coalition government headed by Prime Minister David Cameron has confirmed its commitment to the principle of a sea-based nuclear deterrent state, but the final decision on the matter was postponed until 2016, until after the next parliamentary elections in the country, ITAR TASS.
Earlier period, it was decided to conduct a painstaking analysis of different options for the modernization of the «Trident» given the fact that the construction of even 3 «Saksessor» and placing their nuclear weapons can claim up to $ 100 billion lb. st. (160 billion dollars), and then besides 3 billion lb st. on their yearly service. Carrying out such a comprehensive analysis has been entrusted to former Minister for the Armed Forces Nick Harvey. And after that, in September 2012 he resigned, the mission continued analysis was assigned to Alexander, who for the first time in this capacity and laid out, in an interview with «The Guardian», its position on this important issue for the security of the country.
«We are in a situation where the costs of the following (upgraded) system will have to pay from the budget of the Ministry of Defence, — he said. — And we have no magic pot with the media from which we could draw funds besides the budget. We, as a government, is always true about it stated. At least, I did, and the Minister of Finance. «
Alexander gave to understand that in the current real criteria in England no other ability to retain its own «nuclear shield», not including how to find an acceptable candidate existing system «Trident». He refrained from specifying options on the grounds that before the end of the analysis of this information is public and secret.
«We need to look at whether there are other ways of substitution, which could be more cost-effective, — he said. — For the first time in a long time we asked ourselves these questions. We really need to ask these questions of principle regarding our position. Is it really necessary in the XXI century on a daily basis, 7 days a week, 12 months a year to keep on duty at sea submarines? All it asks for thorough analysis and consideration of the submission of alternatives. «