Other can be found in The Times editorial of a couple of weeks ago which called for a continued build-up cf military pressure on the 'evil emaure (ne limes words). searching It might be thought that this hard the product deanously reactionary ideological bostility to the Soviet Union. But this is not really the main thing at all. What CONCHIS her is the British state's increasingly desperate political problems in trying to keep its end up as a major power ll the The British state establishment is threatened over the next few years with the prospect of sinking to the status third Two things count in the politics of the alliance: military muscle. The British economy is suffering from galloping muscular avstroone wnich is not going to be reversed, making Britain a third class economic power. This in turn is linked to the growing military enfeeblement of Britain in comparison with both the French and Germans.
Trident To keep her end up vis a vis the French and Germans, Thatcher has ino ideas: slavish support for the administration, hoping favours in return, and Trident.
Trident is, in fact, the big favour in return, even though economic point of view it is little short of a catastrophe. But Thatcher hopes that it will be political value money because it will. at a stroke. enable her to get back on equal power terms with the rrench and Germans. She probably even dreams of the following coup.
The French German establishments want lo snow tneir dectorates that a West European defence bloc of the Americans is beginning What this bloc would lack is a credible nuclear umbrella. Trident could appear to provide it, giving Britain a supposed 'lead' in the bloc. At the same time, the Americans don't want to see a genuinely independent West military bloc. Trident solves that problem too: with it as the umbrella, the Americans keep control they service Trident!).
So instead of Thatcherite Britain sinking ignominiously between Western Europe and the US, Trident miraculous v makes Britain the ivnchmilitarist bluff of Thatcher's could be destroyed by the stroke of a pen at "reneva There scheme for building an arsenal of wcaDons that could destrov Soviet missiles in space before they missiles that can hit a super-power. If agreements over these issues could be reached this would obviously be an excellent thing for the British people. But it would be a catastrophe for the Taking the stategic missiles talks both Polaris and Trident are strategic called tactical nukes - SS20s and Cusc numbers upon whether Thatcher is a good made possible by US assistance, Thatcher got too big for her boots and had the cheek to start toying with the idea that she could run her the Iranians and considering pulling in autumn 1983, vice-president Bush casually remarked that British nukes would probably eventually have to be brought into the US-Soviet negotiacontrol deal on strategic nukes? Better to back the Prince of Darkness, nightmare for Thatcher. we have a common Soviet-West German position: for a complete ban on wars. port this position because Reagan has set his heart on Star Wars, and if she riled him she would lose Trident and Polaris in the strategic missiles talks, two posibilities: one is limited Star Wars defence to ensure a degree of protection; the second, bolder idea is to swap research information with the Soviets so that both sides have Star 1IUW death for Polaris and Trident, since any Soviet Star Wars defence would destroy the credibility of the British nukes. So by far the best policy is to work to support the hawks in the US administration and oppose a deal with the most hawkish stand on arms control within NATO (just as it did during SALT I at the start of the 1970s)
cher's rule has given the British state new authority in East-West relations?
evel bachev, no less, is coming to London. want any successtul arms falsity of such claims so clearly as Mr cono no because o me mce e independent power of the British state but precisely because of its ever closer dependence and client status vis a vis useful to the Russians because they want to know what the US is thinking ostpolitik lay in ruins. To rub salt into wounds, Washington's Italian foreign minister, Mr Andreotti, publically denounced 'PanGermanism' and roundly declared that the two German states should never unile taneously encouraged German right wing nationalism in Germany and encouraged protests against it outside Germany. Not for the first time in the and Moscow found themselves in tacbecome the interlocutor between the super powers? Not at all: Moscow has decided to talk to the Reagan administration direct. But at the same time, it suits the Soviet leadership to water e arrolle Eastern Europe mouthing pompous platitudes as a snub to a West German government that has become used, in the last decade, to treating the region OWLI it knows that Thatcher will not dare