Kate Hudson
Britain has a new government. The Tories are gone, after 14 years of misrule, of austerity, erosion of the welfare state, and vast amounts of public money sunk into nightmare nuclear weapons. But what comes next?
A Labour government that has committed to a ‘triple lock on Trident’, increasing military spending to 2.5 percent of GDP, and everlasting support for NATO.
Clearly there is much work to be done, but there is a new atmosphere, a more positive atmosphere which, for me at least, is shaped by some specific factors.
The first is enormous relief and happiness that CND vice-president Jeremy Corbyn has been re-elected, as an independent MP – so we will have his powerful and principled voice for peace in parliament, unconstrained by attempts of party whips or leaderships to silence him.
It has also been great to see the election of four other independent candidates on the platform of ceasefire in Gaza, responding to the ‘No Ceasefire, No Vote’ slogan of our Palestine solidarity movement.
Together with MPs from other parties that oppose the genocide and support a free and sovereign Palestinian state, this will be a strong base in parliament and we are looking forward to working with them.
Secondly, since the UK general election, we have had the election results from France: the far right has been defeated by an enormous electoral surge of the French people, as well as massive street mobilisations of the young, of diverse communities, standing up for the France they want to live in.
At this point, let me say Vive la France! We need some more of that unity of left and progressive forces here in Britain.
Clearly there is much more analysis to be done but: Labour has a landslide of seats based on fewer votes than it received in 2019: 9.7 million this time, compared with 10.3 million in 2019. The right-wing vote has been split between Tories on 6.8 million and Reform on four million; they may regroup and attempt a comeback at the next election. These are big challenges, moving forward.
Other issues are raised too. The SNP has been much reduced: what will this mean for anti-nuclear work in Scotland, where the promise of Scottish independence seemed to provide a way for dealing with the problem of nuclear weapons? Hopes for independence have been dealt a bitter blow.
In better news, the Green Party now has four seats; they are good on many peace and anti-war issues but they have recently changed their policy on NATO, not in a good way.
The Lib Dems now have a much larger cohort of MPs although they have recently changed their policy on Trident for the worse. But they have a strong anti-Trident group of activists with whom we can re-engage.
Wales is now a Tory-free zone: are there new possibilities for the peace agenda there, especially as peace activists have recently launched a campaign against the US imposition of deep space radar technology in Pembrokeshire?
The Labour government’s policies are explicitly pro-nuclear weapons, pro-increased arms spending, pro-war in Ukraine and Gaza, pro-NATO, and tied into the US ideological and military framework.
Much is the same as the previous government’s policies, but this is a new situation, and we need to assess our strategic approach to the new government.
Labour is expected to undertake a review of military and security policy in its first year. We need to be part of this where possible, and raising the key issues outside the Labour party where direct engagement is not possible.
In CND, we will be highlighting crucial issues, not only immediate urgent issues – Gaza and Ukraine – but broader, underlying policies: nuclear weapons possession; NATO; the return of US nuclear weapons to Lakenheath; the AUKUS alliance with Australia and the US, designed to provide Australia with nuclear-powered submarines and tie them into the US war agenda; the cold war with China; the British economy and the so-called ‘defence’ industry and its relations with sections of the trade union movement.
There are many areas for us to work on, and unity, within the peace movement and beyond, is vital to making progress.
This new post-electoral situation presents us with many challenges, but also opportunities – and hope for the future. Let’s make the most of it!
Kate Hudson is the general secretary of CND.
------------------------
Sam Bannon
While we can all breathe a brief sigh of relief, as the Conservative Party shuffles off its mortal coil, peace activists are facing their greatest challenge in generations: genocide in Gaza, unrivalled in its scale in the 21st century; daily risk of direct confrontation between the superpowers; and a cast-iron guarantee that prime minister Starmer will renew the Trident missile system, and use it if necessary.
Not only has Starmer vowed to put special protection in place for the future of Trident, he has also committed to renewing civil nuclear power, with ‘Great British Energy’, the new publicly-owned ‘clean energy’ investment body.
Beyond just the rollout of a new generation of reactors failing to meet any climate targets, due to the lead time and high emissions resulting from construction, transport of materials and long-term storage of waste, nuclear power is also highly ecologically damaging: uranium is usually mined in pristine habitats (often on First Nation land) in an unimaginably destructive way.
Furthermore, the link between civil nuclear and nuclear weapons is now undeniable. It is well known that the ‘deterrent’ is reliant on weapons-grade plutonium produced in civil nuclear power plants, but it is also dependent on other by-products like tritium gas, which is used to ‘boost’ weapons yields.
Where the half-life of weapons-grade plutonium is over 24,000 years, the half-life of tritium gas is less than 13 years, meaning that a constant supply is required.
The planned renewal of civil nuclear is just one of a litany of Starmer’s plans that keep peace activists awake at night, in Wales in particular: Wylfa on Anglesey has been identified as a preferred site for a new reactor.
Alongside Labour’s commitment to a vast military build-up, Starmer’s administration will very likely continue support for the AUKUS (Australia-UK-US) military pact’s ‘Deep Space Advanced Radar Capability’ (DARC) programme, which will allow the new military alliance to wage war in space, ratcheting up global tensions.
The UK component of DARC will be a gigantic 27-dish radar network in the heart of St Davids peninsula, with implications for the people of Pembrokeshire: the Welsh language, the environment, public health, and the economy.
Finally, there is little doubt that Wales will continue to be both recruitment and training grounds for the British military under Starmer, with 23,400 hectares of land, 85 percent of our skies, and 6,500 square kilometres of sea in Wales being used for training.
Sam Bannon is the project co-ordinator of Heddwch ar Waith / Peace Action Wales (see PN 2672).
-----------
Janet Fenton & David Mackenzie
For nuclear disarmament in Scotland, the election result is a huge setback.
[The pro-disarmament Scottish National Party (SNP) went from having 48 MPs in Westminster to just nine – ed]
We can no longer claim that a clear majority of Scottish parliamentarians have pledged to support the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons – the key indicator of a genuine commitment to nuclear disarmament for Scotland, the UK and the world.
Is the election of parties which have trumpeted their commitment to nuclear weapons, a sign of decline in support for nuclear disarmament?
Is the huge swing away from the SNP a reflection of the growing dissatisfaction with both the Tories and the SNP after long periods in power?
The very low turn out (59 percent) has left us with government by default, rather than any landslide victory.
The Scottish independence referendum turnout 10 years ago was 84 percent.
Yet the shift from 2013 – 2014 is marked.
Then we heard again and again from neighbours, taxi drivers, allotment partners, that the chance of getting rid of the UK’s nukes was a prime motive for a ‘Yes’ vote [for independence – ed].
No doubt, the Ukraine War has moved some people into a pro-‘deterrent’ position, as in Finland and Sweden.
Scottish independence itself, and the chance to kickstart UK disarmament, seems now further away.
A new and much more engaged level of campaigning from Scotland is needed to make clear distinctions between the Scottish and UK governments’ positions, not only on nuclear disarmament but on other related issues, particularly unconditional ceasefire in Gaza, immigration, climate targets and halting the arms trade.
At one level, the election outcome is merely ‘politics’ but it does make sense to accept and take advantage of what is a salutary shock.
The 2013 – 2014 surge mentioned above came after the big civil resistance events around the Clyde nuclear bases from 1998 onwards, culminating in the Faslane 365 campaign, and a new public awareness of the issue. Indy-minded politicians understood that rejecting nukes needed to be a key part of their platform.
We need to patiently rebuild that level of awareness, consciousness and commitment.
Following the 2014 referendum result, the gates at Faslane were blocked within 48 hours.
NGOs like Scottish CND, Secure Scotland, Solidarity Against Neoliberal Extremism are still working on the election result lessons but two things are clear.
Nuclear disarmament can be integrated and better aligned within social change movements like climate and Palestine liberation campaigns with their energy and creativity.
The movement around the TPNW is an open door for making that connection and finding balance between pressuring national decision-makers and accessing the power of human connection beyond the idiotic borders.
Among many other roles, Janet Fenton is the organiser and David Mackenzie is the secretary of Secure Scotland:
www.securescotland.scot
--------------------------
Rob Fairmichael
This is about the elections in a semi-detached part of the UK that is not part of the island of Britain.
Firstly, a few general comments. The first-past-the-post system for Westminster elections is the world’s worst in delivering comparability between votes cast and seats won. And it was not so much a case of Labour winning as Tories losing; apart from an increased vote in Scotland with SNP disarray, the Labour vote share was comparable to the last election. So what was the vilification of Jeremy Corbyn and ‘Corbynism’ all about, since he at least knew the meaning of words like ‘peace’ and ‘nuclear disarmament’?
One of the relatively recent Conservative British secretaries of state for Northern Ireland did not initially know that unionists/cultural Protestants in Northern Ireland do not vote for nationalists/cultural Catholics, and vice versa.
In Northern Ireland, a significant amount of the competition is within unionism and nationalism respectively and overall there was no great change between the two.
However, the dominant unionist party, the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), fared badly and lost a few seats – including the one which had been held by Ian Paisley (junior) and his father, the reverend Ian Paisley, for over half a century; this was lost to the further right Jim Allister, partly because of Paisley’s arrogance and flouting of rules governing declaration of benefits received.
The DUP suffered because of its significant role in backing a hardline Brexit, its lies over the removal of Irish Sea trade barriers between Britain and Northern Ireland . Also, in March, its then leader was charged with child sex offences and rape; more charges were added the day before the UK election.
The centre ground ‘moderate’ Alliance party actually lost a small percentage of votes, so the perceived surge by that party has halted – and was never going to get very far though there are now more people, possibly up to 20 percent, who do not vote on tribal lines.
Public services, especially health, are currently appalling in Northern Ireland; the Economist recently held up Northern Ireland as a dire warning of what could happen to the health service in Britain should things not change. We wait to see whether the Starmer regime will provide the funding Northern Ireland needs.
All the other issues affecting Norn Iron, including internal governance and longer-term constitutional issues (United Kingdom or United Ireland), are unaffected by the British general election.
However, hopefully, Labour will deliver their promise to repeal the NI Legacy Act 2023, introduced to protect British soldiers and the state for their actions during the Troubles.
Rob Fairmichael is the co-ordinator of INNATE (Irish Network for Nonviolent Action Training and Education), based in Belfast: www.innatenonviolence.org
-----------------------
Pat Gaffney
I was worried by the poor ‘show’ of candidates in my local area where we had a boundary change and a fairly safe Labour seat. Broadcasts presented a lot of scapegoating, blaming, interrupting and little real encounter or discussion. That may be due to the way things were set up to offer a show rather than a real debate so I was grateful for the NGOs, including peace organisations, which provided thoughtful analysis of manifestos, especially on peace and social justice policies.
I find it difficult to navigate the pulls between local, national and global concerns and so, how to make decisions?
I liked one meme I saw: ‘think of the most vulnerable and vote in their best interests’.
Social care for all, education, a strengthened NHS, should not be pitted against the needs of migrants, refugees, global development, investment in conflict prevention and peacemaking.
It is not either/or.
With a vision of the common good, all these needs could be met.
“Think of the most vulnerable and vote in their best interests”
We were told to prepare for tough choices while there was never even a doubt about increased military spending and our unwavering commitments to support wars. I baulked that one of the first ‘tasks’ of the prime minister was to write his instructions to the nuclear submarine commander. No challenge then to the threat and use of nuclear weapons.
Does this teach us anything? We have still not cracked it when trying to convey an idea of common, inclusive security for people and planet against the unquestioned model of military security.
Could we better communicate the underlying causes of poverty, war and violence, migration and the climate crisis and the link between them?
Neither have we had sufficient impact on the conduct and style of politics.
Do we do enough to share the nonviolent values and approaches of listening, dialogue, empathy, co-operation and trust, and reflect these in how we go about our own campaigning and engagement?
Opportunities? We now have 260 women in parliament.
While they should not have to bear the entire burden, they may be emboldened to challenge the toxic culture there.
The independents who stood out on the issues of Gaza, war, the arms trade, remind us that people will stand for and vote with a moral compass around issues that trouble them deeply.
We may find allies in the 335 newly-elected MPs.
The strengthened presence of Greens and Lib Dems, to say nothing of Reform, create a wider political mix which will keep us all on our toes.
Pat Gaffney is a vice-president of Pax Christi England and Wales.