Track your comments!
[x]


When you register, comments on your articles and replies to your comments appear here. Register Now!

Sign in to your account
[x]

Not a Scientific Blogging member yet?

Register Now for a Free Scientificblogging.com Account

  • Customize your profile with pictures, banner, a blogroll and more.
  • Leave comments on articles, add other members to your friend lists, chat with people on the site.
  • Write blog posts that can be seen by hundreds of thousands of readers.

It's free and it only takes a minute!

Already a Scientific Blogging member?

Sign In Now

Banner
By Douglas Blane | March 11th 2007 02:23 PM | 13 comments | Print | E-mail | Track Comments
.

More Real science articles

All

About Douglas Blane

Research physicist originally, working on nuclear reactors, autonomous underwater vehicles, smart materials etc. Now journalist, writer and teacher. Maintain website of Full Bio

As Des Browne strides up to me and demands to know who I am, the answer momentarily escapes me. It is on the tip of my tongue and will come to me in a minute, I am sure. But whoever I am, I suddenly realise, this close to Britain's combative Minister of Defence is not where I would like to be.

The occasion is a debate about the morality of replacing Trident, organised by one of Browne’s constituents, Father Joe Boland of St Matthew’s, Kilmarnock.

In opening the debate the priest had done a fine job of demolishing the pro-nuclear arguments. “The government says we don’t know what the world will be like in 30 years’ time, so we need nuclear weapons to keep us secure. But if nuclear weapons equal security, then every country in the world should have them.

“If Iran cannot have nuclear weapons when faced with an immediate threat from nuclear powers, what right have we, based on some future threat? It is sheer hypocrisy.”

Deterrence is doomed to failure, he points out, because it must work without error until the end of time. “We have been incredibly lucky so far.”

When Browne stands up he looks edgy but determined. The politics are complex, he says, and the morality unclear. We must resist more countries getting nuclear weapons, while those that already possess them disarm gradually and multi-laterally.

“That is the answer to the charge of hypocrisy. That is how we will achieve a nuclear-free world.”

In the meantime, deterrence is no more complicated than self-defence, he says. “I learned when I was young that if I didn’t want to fight I had to carry myself in a particular way. I had to generate a sense, on the streets of Scotland, that I could look after myself.”

He still does, I realise, after he has lost the vote and sees me taking notes of a conversation with one of his constituents, Sarah McKee. On the topic of hypocrisy, she is challenging him on accepting the minister of defence post, after attending a rally against the invasion of Iraq.

“I wasn’t there. You are wrong about that,” he tells her.

She starts to ask about his youthful support for CND - the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament - when he sees my notebook and strides purposefully towards me. I identify myself and ask him a question – not the best question to ask a man who already feels under attack.

“I didn’t realise until today that you were brought up as a Catholic …” I begin. But he interrupts, moving closer.

“What's that got to do with anything?” he demands.

“I was wondering about Father Boland’s closing remarks,” I explain. “That in the end his opposition to replacing Trident springs from his Christianity. Jesus taught us to turn the other cheek, to love our neighbour. He would never have supported nuclear weapons.”

Browne responds that the churches disagree on war and nuclear weapons. Some support unilateral disarmament. Some don't. Then he goes on the attack.

“Are you a Christian?” he asks me.

“No,” I say. So he changes tack.

“Were you in favour of intervening in Kosovo?”

“Yes.”

"Bosnia?"

"Yes."

“What about Afghanistan?”

“Well…” I prevaricate.

“There you are…” he starts to say, but I misunderstand.

“Don’t give me that lawyer’s stuff about having to answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’," I say, annoyed. "Afghanistan was complex, militarily and politically.”

“Of course it was. That’s my point,” he replies. “International issues always are. It’s all very well saying ‘nuclear weapons are morally wrong’. But we live in a dangerous and complex world.”

True enough, I think to myself, casting my mind back 25 years to when I was a physicist with a young family, working for Rolls Royce & Associates in Derby. Working on the next generation propulsion system for the Navy’s nuclear submarines. The system that now propels the largest, most powerful submarines ever built in Britain.

The system that carries Trident.

But there is no more time for debate. The parish priest and the Minister of Defence have to leave. They are dining together this evening in the priest’s home.

“Nice talking to you,” Browne says, offering his hand.

I take it. His grip is firm but not crushing.

Deterrent.


Comments

I think he brings up a "practical" point that the world is complex, and maybe nuclear weapons are neccesary.  For example I can think of a few reason why we might need nuclear weapons, or rather devices that produce a huge amount of energy in a short amount of time.  Perhaps, someday we might need to blow up an asteroid or something crazy like that.  But none of the uses I can see as a weapon against other countries make any sense.   Plus, I am sure if we needed a nuke an didn't have any around because we dimantled them all, that we could create one in relatively little time.

Hi Albert,

The problem with the 'relatively little time' you talk about is that the physicists and engineers with the necessary expertise will, by that time, have moved on to other areas, and lost their cutting-edge in that one.

Trying to retain these guys in the nuclear industry is one of the main reasons the UK government is moving now - which seems far too early to many people - to replace Trident. Our politicians are voting on it day after tomorrow, and there's no doubt it will go through, despite a lot of opposition.

The Institute of Physics, incidentally, uses the same line of thought to come to the opposite conclusion - that keeping these scientists working on nuclear deterrence is a serious mistake. It means they won't be available to tackle far more urgent issues, such as climate change.


Hank's picture
This is brilliant stuff. We just had 300 people read a news release on why female chimps choose a mate and only 80 people read this so far. I am going to work on that.

Maybe it was 300 male chimps looking for dating advice.

Chimps are a lot smarter than we used to think, according to research reported in last week's New Scientist and right here at scienceblogging.

If chimps can make spears and hammers maybe they can read blogs. How hard can it be?


Commenting on your point Hank, like I've already said before, I don't want just another news site.    I want people's real thoughts and stories straight from them, and I want to talk about important issues with people for sure.  Intelligent people are few and far between, but now they don't have to be?...

Hank's picture
I agree! Something like this has never been done before but we're dong it now. We have terrific writers and a community where everyone can have their opinion and debate. I am sure there will be fights - in any community people get passionate - but as long as everyone is fighting for good science, the best results will occur.

What are your future plans for this site?  It it ends up being successful and draws a large number of people into its community, then what?  What is your role of the owner of the site?  Where is the equity actually held?  Is it stored in the community?  It would be funny to sell a community.  (Insane Haha), its like if only the Native Americans had it that good when european colonists came over.   Imagine if we could have just sold their communties as well as their land.  No Trail of Tears that's for sure. 

Hank's picture
If this were about money you and I could think of 10,000 ways to make more. 4 months of work from 4 people for no revenue is not a smart money-making move on our part.

I think all of us, and most readers, have wanted this kind of site. It's good science, good writing and a good community. So we're just making it and you and the readers will shape the culture.

On the equity stuff, I don't think about that. Who owns the the equity in YouTube? They generated $15 million in revenue but sold for $1.6 billion. Did they pay out part of that to all those kids posting air guitar videos?? I have no idea. ha ha

I promise if Google buys this site for $1.6 billion, you will be rewarded. At least a t-shirt. Maybe a t-shirt and a coffee mug. One of those big 20 oz. things! :-)

Cool, I was just wondering if you guys were a business or what, I had no idea exactly.  But that doesn't mean you don't have value stored up in your community.  I think there are actually two ways this site in specific actually generates value in the business sense.  Normally you would hvae to pay all these smart guys to be writing articles on your site, but now they are doing it for free.  Second is the actual community itself has intangible value to advertisers and can be sold, like we all know is what happend with Youtube.  So when can I get that T-Shirt! :) I would seriously where it.  Haha. Good promo, especially for people like me who are young, head strong, and have almost no established professional crediabilty.  

Des Browne is not an intelligent man,perhaps the reason for Rory Bremner impersonating him last week,making him out to be an undecider who talks gibberish.
Browne refers to the issue of Trident as "complex" this is simply to underline the fact that he has nothing sensible to say on this, or any other, issue.
He has been appointed to this position because he is a supine and morose MP, willing to follow the Bliar/Bush line on anything he is told to.
No doubt Browne believes that 9/11 was engineered by Bin Laden and not the US government as the evidence grows of an "inside job".
I am listening now to the Alex Jones show on www.prisonplanet.com and hearing that up to 3000 Boeing jetliners are currently fitted with remote control chips and explosives ready to be used as weapons against whatever target America may see fit.
We must stop America's current foreign policy to dominate the world before it is too late,Trident is only part of it and people like Browne should stand up for democracy not speak to people as if they are idiots.
Who are you? Mr Browne.
PS Vote this menace out,vote SNP!!!!!

While I don't agree with Des Browne's conclusions, I found him more impressive in person than on television.

You never know for sure with politicians, but he seemed genuinely convinced of the arguments he was putting forward - which had some logic to them even if they didn't persuade the audience.

Now that I've listened to the man at some length, I would take issue with your comments. He is an intelligent and capable guy. It's possible to be both of those and still wrong.


"Genuinely convinced" ?
Well,I'm not!
Her we see another example of the Labour politburo dictating the party line which assumes we can all be brainwashed into believing that we need more nuclear weapons on this planet.
Who exactly is it we are defending ourselves against?
China?, Russia?,North Korea?,Iran?,India?,Pakistan?,Israel?
all these countries have nuclear weapons,are they forming the global alliance against the so called western democracies?
Or are they the global terrorists?
In this age of turbo capitalism there is no enemy, only that funded by the American military industrial complex which seeks to arm the world against itself.
The new world order is devoted to spending billions on super weapons in order to control and subjugate the people of the world,by listening to this rhetoric we are accepting it,Des Browne is just another mouthpiece for those whose agenda is driven by the weapons manufacturers.
Today a Labour minister resigned over Trident,lets hope that more have the guts to stand up against this mindless tyranny.

Well put. 

Add a comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <sup> <sub> <a> <em> <strong> <center> <cite> <code> <TH><ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <img> <br> <p> <blockquote> <strike> <object> <param> <embed> <del> <pre> <b> <i> <table> <tbody> <div> <tr> <td> <h1> <h2> <h3> <h4> <h5> <h6> <hr> <iframe>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
CAPTCHA
If you register, you will never be bothered to prove you are human again. And you get a real editor toolbar to use instead of this HTML thing that wards off spam bots.