UK and France agree to joint nuclear weapons tests

[TimothyC]

1 November 2010 Last updated at 21:55 ET

UK and France agree to joint nuclear weapons tests

The UK and France are to sign a treaty agreeing to the joint development and testing of nuclear warheads.

The plans will see one centre set up in the UK to develop technology and another in France to carry out testing.

Prime Minister David Cameron and President Nicolas Sarkozy will also outline plans, at a London summit, for a joint army expeditionary force.

Downing Street called the measures "practical", but Labour said they left "big questions" over the UK's defences.

A Downing Street spokesman said: "This summit marks a deepening of the UK-France bilateral relationship. Ours is now a strategic partnership tackling together the biggest challenges facing our two countries."

The summit comes two weeks after the UK government announced cuts to its armed forces, in the first strategic defence review since 1998, as part of savings aimed at reducing the country's budget deficit.

Under the plans, £750m will be saved over four years on the Trident nuclear missile system by cutting the number of warheads.

Harrier jump jets, the Navy's flagship HMS Ark Royal and planned Nimrod spy planes will also be axed, but two new aircraft carriers were spared.

Mr Cameron and Mr Sarkozy are to sign two treaties - one on greater general military co-operation and the other on nuclear weapons.
Operational veto

The latter will establish a centre in the UK to develop technology and another one in France to carry out the testing.

It is understood that each country will still control its own warheads, and that nuclear secrets will not be shared.

The other treaty will allow the setting up of a "combined joint expeditionary force", thought to involve a brigade of about 5,000 soldiers from each side.

Each country will retain a veto for each operation, which will operate under one military commander to be chosen at the time.

The UK and France have also agreed to keep at least one aircraft carrier at sea between them at any one time.

Each will be able to use the other's carrier in some form, certainly for training and possibly operations.

Meanwhile, France is to use British A400M fuelling aircraft when there is spare capacity, with plans in place for common maintenance and training.
'Deepening ties'

Joint work on drones, mine counter-measures and satellite communications is also proposed.

In a statement, the French presidency said the test centre in Valduc, eastern France, would start operations in 2014.

The Valduc laboratory would work with a French-British research centre based in Aldermaston, Berkshire, it added.

Together the facilities would involve "several dozen" French and British experts and cost both countries several million euros.

It said scientists from both countries would be able to ensure the "viability, safety and security in the long term of our nuclear arsenals".

Mr Cameron told MPs on Monday: "I do seriously believe that this link-up with the French over defence is in the long term interests of both our countries.

"And to those who worry that this might in some way lead to... European armies, that is not the point. The point is to enhance sovereign capability by two like-minded countries being able to work together."

The UK's shadow defence secretary Jim Murphy said: "I support the government's emphasis on international co-operation, taking forward the good work of the last government.

"We share common threats with countries such as France, from terrorism to privacy to cyber-attack. Deepening military ties is an essential part of modern defence policy.

"Interdependence, however, is different from dependence, and binding legal treaties pose some big questions for the government."

Mr Murphy also questioned whether the the UK was entering "an era where we are reliant on our allies to fill in the gaps in the government's defence policy".

The back of my brain says that this is partially the result of the faux pas that the current American administration has had in the foreign policy arena.

[Shroom Man 777]

What faux pas would that be? Cause my back of my brain says it's not the current American administration, but the previous one, which was basically an eight year long faux pas in the foreign policy arena.

[Sea Skimmer]

The back of my brain says that this is partially the result of the faux pas that the current American administration has had in the foreign policy arena.

I don’t think so, Euros joining up with the US on nuclear warhead design this tightly doesn’t make sense. The British and French want an independent deterrent in the EU, and for good reasons given how unstable the Mid East is. Sharing expensive specialist R&D facilities makes sense as an end to the goal when its obvious that both countries have fast eroding military strength. The French nuclear delivery systems are all US independent, and while the British use of Trident D5 missiles is totally dependent on the US the warheads are not. As long as you can make warheads you can always quickly field nuclear gravity bombs again and put them into other weapons.

Sharing the warhead design and testing process with the US would remove a lot of flexibility, and frankly at that point one should seriously question why you would bother with the nuclear deterrent at all. It'd become a totally direct extension of US capability and subject to US veto in almost as much the way of the 'duel key' US nuclear weapons fielded for NATO use.

[Shroom Man 777]

I can't see how other nations wishing some degree of independence or autonomy or flexibility in their own capabilities as to not be totally dependent on America and suckling on its pentomic teats can be interpreted as a Zerobamasamabinladenaramamcnamara administration faux pas. Unless other countries becoming autonomous and independent of the USA is considered a bad thing*, somehow someway.


*It is a wonderful thing.

[TimothyC]

The back of my brain says that this is partially the result of the faux pas that the current American administration has had in the foreign policy arena.

I don’t think so, Euros joining up with the US on nuclear warhead design this tightly doesn’t make sense. The British and French want an independent deterrent in the EU, and for good reasons given how unstable the Mid East is. Sharing expensive specialist R&D facilities makes sense as an end to the goal when its obvious that both countries have fast eroding military strength. The French nuclear delivery systems are all US independent, and while the British use of Trident D5 missiles is totally dependent on the US the warheads are not. As long as you can make warheads you can always quickly field nuclear gravity bombs again and put them into other weapons.

Sharing the warhead design and testing process with the US would remove a lot of flexibility, and frankly at that point one should seriously question why you would bother with the nuclear deterrent at all. It'd become a totally direct extension of US capability and subject to US veto in almost as much the way of the 'duel key' US nuclear weapons fielded for NATO use.

And the little voice in the back of my head has been wrong before, and will be wrong again. You raise good points. Makes me wonder if they are also looking at cooperation for the post-SLBM era.

What faux pas would that be? Cause my back of my brain says it's not the current American administration, but the previous one, which was basically an eight year long faux pas in the foreign policy arena.

with regards to the UK everything from the Gift controversy to the Falklands dispute.

[Rabid]

Excellent. Ex-ce-llent. Everything goes according to plan. *sneer*

Soon the Crown of England - no, all of Britain ! shall be ours ; And the name of the Bourbons will shine anew over all of Europe !

All will bow before the Britagallian Empire !

*maniacal laughter*

---

More seriously, that's a great new - somehow.

I have to say that I'm a bit concerned, though. The fact is, since the Britons joined the EU, they were a bit of a pain in the asses, you know, with their "special relationship" with the US - a bit more like vassalage than partnership from my point of view, but well... Always dragging us behind, all this sh*t, y'know?

If it makes us, UK and France a little more independent vis-a-vis the American Empire, well, count me in it. If it's the contrary and it makes us lose a little bit more our our cherished Independence, well, let's scrap that thing pronto and forget it forever.

Now, let's hope it's not another "Concorde" : great idea, great expectation, great technological results at the end, but practically an utter disaster when it comes to draw back some profits from the damn thing.
Let's hope we will have learned our lessons from this fiasco.

[That NOS Guy]

Now, let's hope it's not another "Concorde" : great idea, great expectation, great technological results at the end, but practically an utter disaster when it comes to draw back some profits from the damn thing.
Let's hope we will have learned our lessons from this fiasco.

Isn't the point of nuclear weapons to deliver an incalculable monetary profit? I mean, unless you're selling the things, there's no real "profit" that can be extracted outside of the big intangibles like "having the ability to strike back". I think if a nuclear weapons program meets the first three qualifiers then it's a success, profit be damned, wouldn't you?

[Rabid]

I misspoke. What I wanted to say was :

- When you make a project to make a commercially viable supersonic freighter/courier, you hope it to be, well... commercially viable, isn't it ?

-When you design a nuclear deterrence force, you hope it will be... practical, somehow. A deterrent isn't threatening when you know that the missiles can't hit you or that the bombs are just goods to fizzle a bit.

I hope I've made my point clearer.

[Eleas]

Excellent. Ex-ce-llent. Everything goes according to plan. *sneer*

Soon the Crown of England - no, all of Britain ! shall be ours ; And the name of the Bourbons will shine anew over all of Europe !

All will bow before the Britagallian Empire !

All, you say? No! One tiny village...

More seriously, that's a great new - somehow.

I have to say that I'm a bit concerned, though. The fact is, since the Britons joined the EU, they were a bit of a pain in the asses, you know, with their "special relationship" with the US - a bit more like vassalage than partnership from my point of view, but well... Always dragging us behind, all this sh*t, y'know?

Well, if they can reduce the massive amount of corruption in Brussels and the enormous ball-and-chain that is the French agricultural subsidy, that would be a very good step, I'm thinking. But somehow I doubt that's on their agenda.

[Psychic_Sandwich]

It's not just nuclear testing cooperation. There's plans for pooling aircraft carriers and aerial refueling capability, and a standing Anglo-French multi-brigade quick response force as well. This is the sort of thing that, fifty years down the line, gets looked back upon as the foundation of a European military (despite current protestations to the contrary), although it remains to be seen whether it has the ability to evolve into such a thing.

[Phantasee]

Well, who remembers the secret discussions between the UK and France to unify under the British monarchy in the period just after WWII? This seems like something that is going to happen eventually.

[Rabid]

Yeah. An Euroforce would be a good thing - but only if all the countries involved were to have the same diplomatic line. Not :

"Me I want ta go wiv Dubbya !"
"No me I dant ! I dant I dant ! *roll into its own pee*"

Some coordination on the diplomatic level would be... a pleasant thing.

* * *

A precedent exist,between Germany and France : There is the "French/German Defense and Security Council". There is also -or was, I don't know the current state of the affair - a little corp of soldiers composed of French and German volunteers, which are/were under the command of both parties. If I recall correctly, the number of involved soldiers was something like 1000-1500 peoples - roughly a Regiment.
Although I don't know if we have any kind of agreement concerning our force projection capabilities, or any of that stuff for that matter. But I'm pretty sure that for the Germans, when we proposed them to take them under our nice nuclear umbrella, we obtained just a fat, dry, and cold "no" - you know, the ones only them could give you...
This maybe have something to with them not being happy about the perspective of us dropping nukes on their soil "for their own good". Who would have known ? *shrug and nod head*

---

Well, who remembers the secret discussions between the UK and France to unify under the British monarchy in the period just after WWII? This seems like something that is going to happen eventually.

If my memory serve me, I think it wasn't after but during WWII, shortly before the French People the French Government surrendered : At desperate times, desperate measures.

I wonder how the Union Jack would look like with France's color on it...

...

*Zelda's "item found" music* :
"You found a new story idea !"

[Big Orange]

I have to say that I'm a bit concerned, though. The fact is, since the Britons joined the EU, they were a bit of a pain in the asses, you know, with their "special relationship" with the US - a bit more like vassalage than partnership from my point of view, but well... Always dragging us behind, all this sh*t, y'know?

Here's an interesting essay by Charles Grant on Britain's awkward and antagonistic, but increasingly beneficial relationship with mainland Europe:

Why is Britain Eurosceptic? (PDF)

And isn't half of Britain's self-privatised electrical grid run by EDL?

[Phantasee]

What the fuck was with that poster, Rabid? A European tower of Babel? "Many Tongues, One Voice" is pretty amusing.

[Rabid]

What the fuck was with that poster, Rabid? A European tower of Babel? "Many Tongues, One Voice" is pretty amusing.

As far as I know, it's some early and poorly executed European propaganda on which the NWO-nutters screech like hell...

Please take note of the architecture of the European Parliament in Strasbourg : image
Your choice :
- An unfinished tower of babel meaning an ever growing Union
or
- The Coliseum, remain of a former great Empire.

---

@ Big Orange : Interesting essay. But I must note that what is considered "beneficial" by the author of this paper is what a number of other EU countries would find as signs of failure of the European integration process (eg : over-expansion meaning a less "coherent" Union ; end of the Federalist dream ; etc.). So, my point still hold about the Britons somehow dragging the EU behind, or at least interfering with the greater goal of a "United States of Europe".

And isn't half of Britain's self-privatised electrical grid run by EDL?

Dont you mean "EDF" : Electricité de France ?
But yes, I think that is true. It seems to me that Britons are more interested by business than by holding a grip on their own strategic sectors (armament, energy, etc.). I hope for them I'm mistaken, though.

[Thanas]

A precedent exist,between Germany and France : There is the "French/German Defense and Security Council". There is also -or was, I don't know the current state of the affair - a little corp of soldiers composed of French and German volunteers, which are/were under the command of both parties. If I recall correctly, the number of involved soldiers was something like 1000-1500 peoples - roughly a Regiment.

It is a brigade, really and numbers a full 5000 troops. It has also been deployed in Bosnia. Not a little corps by any meaning of the word, though it is part of Eurocorps.

Although I don't know if we have any kind of agreement concerning our force projection capabilities, or any of that stuff for that matter.

AFAIK, there is a cooperation agreement with regards to the Eurobrigade and other forces, though I don't know the details.

But I'm pretty sure that for the Germans, when we proposed them to take them under our nice nuclear umbrella, we obtained just a fat, dry, and cold "no" - you know, the ones only them could give you...
This maybe have something to with them not being happy about the perspective of us dropping nukes on their soil "for their own good". Who would have known ? *shrug and nod head*


Well, you neglect to mention that this proposal would have in essence made the whole German Army a junior partner of the French, as they insisted on having overall command etc. Sorry, but Germany is not going to play auxillary to the French. And Germany is not going to pay for the French nuclear forces without getting equal shares.

[Rabid]

It is a brigade, really and numbers a full 5000 troops. It has also been deployed in Bosnia. Not a little corps by any meaning of the word, though it is part of Eurocorps.

Yes, yes... Well, that truly show that I'm military-illiterate.

Well, you neglect to mention that this proposal would have in essence made the whole German Army a junior partner of the French, as they insisted on having overall command etc. Sorry, but Germany is not going to play auxillary to the French. And Germany is not going to pay for the French nuclear forces without getting equal shares.

Nah, you're doing it wrong. Here I'm supposed to say :
"All will kneel before the might of the French Republic"
And then, you are supposed to respond :
"Yes, my Master."

...

Really, we know how to be real son of bitches when we want it... No mystery we are seen as arrogant assholes after things like that.

---

Back on topic : I'm curious to see where this will lead us. This might prove interesting in the decades to come, if this agreement prove to be more than just a political / diplomatic move.
*look on a calendar*
1904 : "Entente Cordiale"
1914 : WWI
1939 : WWII
1945 : Cold War

France & UK : An common history of gang-assaults on Germany

...

Merkel, we're coming to you !

---

Hope this won't have a negative impact on the German-French household...

[Thanas]

Without American support, you will get your behinds kicked like the last times *cough* Napoleon I-II *cough*. But this tangent stops right here.

Back on topic, everybody.

[Thanas]

What faux pas would that be? Cause my back of my brain says it's not the current American administration, but the previous one, which was basically an eight year long faux pas in the foreign policy arena.

with regards to the UK everything from the Gift controversy to the Falklands dispute.

Pretty much small fries compared to groping the most powerful woman in the world.

[Singular Intellect]

Some clarification here: does this mean they'll actually be detonating nuclear weapons for testing? Or did I miss something obvious?

[Uraniun235]

This article seems to suggest that the facility for testing is designed to thoroughly image non-nuclear dummy bomb blasts in an attempt to gather more data that can be fed into the supercomputers that presently simulate nuclear weapons in order to test reliability.


There's a part of me that was irresponsibly hoping the French would light one off above-ground and give us some high-definition digital video footage of a nuclear weapons test.

[TithonusSyndrome]

I dunno; Sikon used to talk about simulating the effects of the Krakatoa eruption with a global campaign of nuclear devices to combat global warming, maybe in the near future the research could be turned to that and presumably some amount of above-ground detonation would be required.

[Rabid]

This article seems to suggest that the facility for testing is designed to thoroughly image non-nuclear dummy bomb blasts in an attempt to gather more data that can be fed into the supercomputers that presently simulate nuclear weapons in order to test reliability.

Well, in fact, they are some sort of nuclear bomb, somehow, as far as I know. If I remember well, they consist of a little gold shell containing a mix of deuterium and tritium, initiated by what will be, I think, the most powerful know set of laser (the 'Laser Terajoule').
The goal is to study in detail the thermonuclear initiation process.

There's a part of me that was irresponsibly hoping the French would light one off above-ground and give us some high-definition digital video footage of a nuclear weapons test.

Well, the last time we did that, the Aussies, the Kiwi, and generally all the Pacific's countries weren't that happy... That, and the fact we created Godzilla in the process. The City of New-York seem like it can't forgive us for that...

I dunno; Sikon used to talk about simulating the effects of the Krakatoa eruption with a global campaign of nuclear devices to combat global warming, maybe in the near future the research could be turned to that and presumably some amount of above-ground detonation would be required.

That, my friend, is the most Crazy Awesome suggestion I've heard so far to end global warming. And I have to put an heavy emphasis on both Crazy and Awesome.
Awesome : Do I need to explain ?
Crazy : Even in a WWIII scenario, it seems highly unlikely that we could be able to trigger a nuclear winter, for two reasons : One, it is likely we won't send so much particles in the high atmosphere ; two, the theory behind 'nuclear winter' as been debunked a while ago, if I remember correctly. I think it's noted somewhere in Stuart's 'Nuclear Warfare 101'. Plus the fact that nuclear initiation have a bad habit of both destroying the ozone layer AND producing a fucking shit-load on an epic scale of doom amount of greenhouse gases.
So, it would be a net negative in result to try to fight global warming with nuclear devices.

Yes, that's kinda boring, but there IS problems that can't be solved with nukes... Sad, isn't it ?

[TimothyC]

There's a part of me that was irresponsibly hoping the French would light one off above-ground and give us some high-definition digital video footage of a nuclear weapons test.

How is that irresponsible? They would just be demonstrating the reliability of the deterrent. Plus were I a betting man, I'd bet that the total radionuclide release would be less than what China's coal plants liberate into the atmosphere every year.

[Pelranius]

I'd rather use nuclear blasts as a way to launch payloads into orbit. If only one of the more environmentally unfriendly nations would do that.