Europe and the bomb
Sir: If your interpretation of 'holding our nuclear force in trust for Europe' (12 May) is correct, Mr Heath's proposal is verbally provocative without signifying very much. It can be translated as: our nuclear force will continue in being, and remain a national force until Britain is part of a Wes European state of some kind. The rest follows automatically—apart from cooperation in research with France, and the 'McNamara' Committee.
A. much more interesting proposal to the Six might be to hand over control (and finance) of our nuclear force to the WEU. It is unreasonable to expect the Germans, Italians, Dutch and Bel- gians to be inferior to the British and French in nuclear matters until the day, perhaps infinitely distant, when Europe is 'genuinely united.' Also, the mounting cost of keeping a nuclear force abreast of technical development could conceivably be met on this basis, which it really cannot by a single medium-sized nation.
As to whether the force had any credibility as a deterrent, that would depend on what we were trying to deter, how much we were prepared to spend, and how believable a control system ass set up. The view that control of a nuclear force must be by a single state, of seamless sovereignty, looks like dogma rather than proved fact to me.
Mr Duncan Sandys has proposed the revival of the EDF plan. That, or a more limited nuclear plan, might conceivably gain us the political in- fluence in Western Europe that we seek, and which appears to be the only short-term advantage of membership of the Common Market. Perhaps oe should be wise to apply for associate status after all!
Derek Bloom Flat 3, 23 Roland Gardens, London SW7
Previous page
