nuclear-news

Documents reveal UK’s plans for rolling out nuclear weapons

World War 3: UK’s plan for ‘rapid deployment of nuclear weapons’ in 24 hours exposed  https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1219002/world-war-3-uk-nuclear-weapon-deployment-24-hours-soviet-union-cold-war-spt, by CALLUM HOARE, Mon, Dec 30, 2019 |

THE UK planned to roll out its nuclear arsenal in as little as 24 hours in what would have been a “frenetic” response to the Soviet Union’s escalation of war in the Eighties, documents seen by Express.co.uk reveal.

The 1983 papers came at a time of intense tensions, as the Cold War reached boiling point, threatening to topple into World War 3. The US and the Soviet Union were jostling for world supremacy and, as the threat of nuclear war increased, allies on both sides prepared for how they would respond, including the UK. Ministry of Defence documents expose a top secret mission for “rapid deployment of nuclear weapons” in the event things spiralled out of control.

One document seen by Express.co.uk reads: “The Secretary of State asked for further advice on the arrangements which would be needed for the rapid deployment of Tactical Nuclear Warheads (TNW) in a crisis on the assumption that all naval nuclear weapons were stored in the UK in peacetime.

“A plan – Operation Perfidious – is already in existence to allow for the rapid deployment of TNW from the stock-pile at RAF Honington in Suffolk, either directly by helicopter to the ship, or to service airfields in the UK by helicopter or C130 Hercules aircraft for onward transmission to ships.

“Theoretically, transfer from Honington to sea could take as little as 24 hours, but this assumes that the ships are close to the Norfolk coast and that all the assets from the movement are available.

The documents go on to discuss the need to act quickly, and the risks the Soviet Union posed.

They add: “Nuclear stockpiles are known to be prime targets for Soviet Special Forces.

“Additionally, each time a nuclear weapon is moved there is a safety risk, a security risk, and, if the timing of the move can be predicted, a risk of civil, industrial or even military intervention.

“The risks are small if the move is preplanned and conducted in isolation of all other activities.

The risks would be higher if hurried embarkation of a large number of TNW were attempted amidst all the other preparations for war under the eagle eyes of the media and anti-war faction.

“Nuclear stockpiles could be created around the country, but the cost in preparing storage facilities and the manpower necessary to service and guard such areas would be disproportionately high.”

Thankfully, they were never needed.

While tension did reach unthinkable levels, both the US and the Soviet Union were aware of each other’s nuclear capabilities.

As a result, the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction was accepted between the two.

This was the belief that a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by two or more opposing sides would cause the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender.

It is based on the theory of deterrence, which holds that the threat of using strong weapons against the enemy prevents the enemy’s use of those same weapons.

January 1, 2020 Posted by Christina Macpherson | UK, weapons and war | Leave a comment