poliey go like this. At the last election People need to feel adequately defended.
Conventional weanons provide all the defence we need. Other countries. Jike Switzerland and Sweden, Have no nucical weabulls but appéar well-defended.
non-nuclear power, we could follow a range of options. We could increase our military budget, as Kinnock gested in a recent television interview.
We could have effective modern defence i by diverting the money from, say, Trident, to interceptor aircraft, anti-tank guided missiles any amount of new technology weapons. There are 6,514 non-nuclear weapon Lo noose rom. according to the latest ediof Jane's Catalogue of military equipment.
This might mean more expensive defence system but would stimulate the economy by investment industries such as British Aerospace. Arms industry jobs would protected; we would still fulfil NATO: Com comBUICELS to WC would™ by moving towards defensive defence.
There are variations on the same theme. Mary Kaldor suggests DOCTORS that could have adequale territorial cerence that would much reduce VUl present defence budget Others have radical notions of conscription, civilian militia and Hass mobilisation in the event ARGUMENTS FOR having a non-nuclear defence we left ourselves open to the charge that unilateral nuclear disarmament would leave this country 'defenceless'.
of an invasion. These apbe ocal provocative defence measures, but would result in greater militarisation of society.
The more radical alter. native defence ideas have problems for pragmatist. They can't be easily argued the doorstep. They don't shore up belief in the importance of Britain's role. Profit The 'expensive but effective' lobby says votes can only be won by trimming poncies. case defence, nationalism strong, armed state is a preferred Diallullll to disarmament and internationalism. Not only is disarmament out of the window, but socialist ideas are blatantly replaced by capitalist ones For years, the Labour has attacked Western capitalism because it exploits people and resources profit. The war machine feeds on. capitalist economics. nationalism international tension. Peaceful initiatives and international cooperation are not good TOT Nuclear disarmament initiatives which break une ceacock. will cause ripples of internaLullalisill.
Spelt out, it means that unilateral nuclear disarma. ment must for strong defence. Strong modern defence implies that the same tensions exist, that nuclear disarmament has not changed the stale or play.
However, capitalists are adaptable. To meet the needs of a potentially non-nuclear state, , they are now promoting their alternative products.
Forget that the unltimate goal of nuclear disarmament Is a lower level of conventional defence spending. Throw away the steps towards complete Doversa disarmament.
Replace nuclear wcabon. with conventional weapons. Then, persuade the Labour Party to adopt this policy for the next In the final analysis, nuclear disarmament may yet be business. Think of the export potential. Think of the fortunes TOI private investment. Think of the boost for in'Non-nuclear' defence can lead to a further militarisation of society ternational banking.
One problem remains for the of strong defence. Basic assumptions being cuesnored.
First, we have to be clear will we are delen ding. Advocates of strong commitment tradiction in repudiating nuclear wcauls belonging .to nuclear We should formulate socialist foreign policy. Socialism is international, uniting working classes opposition armed capitalist states. Strong seeks to isolate workers within frontiers forces the belief that war is the means of setting conflicts.
A further development which has to be carefully View from
----- pull-quotes -----
defence never question our Get there is a direct con-