This had the potential of being a huge disaster -- especially if it had been enemy nations. Thank God it didn't come to that, and it also involved two allies. But it's still inexcusable.
We learned this morning, and later confirmed by the UK and French governments that two nuclear submarines -- one from each of their fleets -- brushed against each other while both were conducting drills in the Atlantic; and even more bizarre their respective anti-sonar and cloaking technologies (meant to hide from enemies) were so good they didn't see each other coming (the systems are supposed to detect friends, supposed to anyway).
We can laugh about it -- I sure did when I heard it on CBC Radio One this morning -- but bear in mind both subs were carrying nuclear weapons at the time, each with multiple warheads (MIRVs or multiple independent re-entry vehicles in military parlance). Each warhead, capable of a blast over 1000 times bigger than Little Boy which blew up Hiroshima in 1945. While command and control of the MIRVs were maintained at all times and there was never a risk for an accidental launch -- nor were the nuclear reactors that run the ships compromised -- this raises huge questions about what kind of communications go on at NATO and the EU on a daily basis.
Obviously a huge ocean allows missile drills or war games to go on silently and without affecting commercial traffic; but you'd kind of think that countries planning those kinds of activities would offer a heads up to each other (quietly of course) so there are no misunderstandings. There have been several occasions where we've come close to doomsday, when a missile drill was presumed to be an enemy missile launch and a quick call on the Hot Line (actually a combination secure telex, voice and facsimile link-up) had to be made to clear things up.
In order to have peace and freedom, we sometimes have to have war -- and to prepare for that possibility we need as ready an armed service as we can muster. But we don't need stupidity especially when we're towing hardware specifically designed to incinerate the human race.
We know that Harper has long term aspirations for Canada's navy to eventually go nuclear (fulfilling a dream of Mulroney, who then scrapped the idea in the 1980s because of budget constraints) but this should really make all of us wake up. It's bad enough living in the shadow of a nuclear power plant on dry land; imagine having to spend three months or more on or under water and in close quarters with one.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
3 comments:
What makes you think that PM Harper, has a plan to either have nuclear weapons on ships or acquire nuclear power subs or ships? As a keen observer of national defence policy I have not seen any such indications from the current government. Perhaps I am wrong or perhaps you a just trying to paint the current government as something they are not?
It's a fair question, Jo-Lee. I don't have inside information of that nature, if I did I'd be a heck of a lot smarter than the whole Parliamentary Press Gallery put together! But let me put forward three known facts and try to tie them together:
1) AECL is constantly on the edge and needs to be bailed out by taxpayer's money every so often. It needs a big time project --i.e. a reactor sale -- to stay alive; selling isotopes is lucrative but it barely survives on that.
2) Canada's shipbuilding industry is in need of a huge project to save it from totally collapsing. And with our commercial tankers and freighters now made in third world countries the only thing left is military which would have to be Canadian built for security reasons.
3) We bought a few diesel subs from the UK a few years ago to replace our dinosaurs, subs which turned out to be a bill of goods and we're out a couple billion for them. Next time we'll want something that works on day one, and even clean diesel contributes to global warming.
Plus the fact that diesel and nuclear navies don't always mesh that well, even when we're on joint patrols with the Americans or British both of whom have gone all nuclear.
Harper, the pro-military guy, wants to bring our forces into the 21st century. Disagree with him on much I do but our armed forces need a shot in the arm.
Put it all together and it's not a question of if he'll announce a nuclear option, but when. My guess is if he manages to win a majority come next election, he'll dust off the plans then and won't care for a public revolt because he has a majority backing him.
Good grief, talk about stretching a theory.
Nice evidence.
Post a Comment