The UK now relies on Trump for our nuclear weapons – we need to spend more than ever before to free ourselves

Britain’s Trident missiles are in a common pool shared with the US and maintained at Kings Bay, Georgia. Without the cooperation of the Trump administration, Trident wouldn't last longer than a couple of months

Trident missiles are in a common pool shared with the US and maintained at Kings Bay, Georgia (Getty Images)

The report that a Trident missile test went awry, veering not toward its intended target on the west coast of Africa, but toward Florida – just weeks before parliament voted for its renewal – has forced the question of Britain’s nuclear deterrent firmly back into the public agenda.

Number 10 has confirmed that the Prime Minister, Theresa May, was aware of this malfunction before the vote, raising questions over whether she should have revealed information at the time. Scottish First Minister Nicola Sturgeon, for one, believed there should have been “full disclosure”, whilst the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament suggested such information “would have impacted the debate in parliament.”

The Times’ article reporting the incident, however, came at a curious moment, in the immediate aftermath of Trump’s inauguration. The brave new world we find ourselves in calls for Britain to keep her head whilst all around are losing theirs. It may seem strange to use “keep your head” as justification for spending £42bn to renew a weapon capable of rendering the world a barren wasteland, but we have to take into consideration that the man holding the nuclear codes is known for firing off ill-thought out 3am tweets.

Worse still, Britain’s nuclear capabilities are hostage to this shot-gun social media enthusiast’s goodwill. Britain’s Trident missiles are in a common pool shared with the US and maintained at Kings Bay, Georgia. Furthermore, our nuclear warheads are designed and maintained with the help of the US. As Trump beats the isolationist drum, and withdraws from Nato, we may be left militarily out in the cold. It isn’t a stretch for him to withdraw US support for UK nuclear capabilities too. Without the cooperation of the Trump administration, Trident wouldn't last longer than a couple of months.

Though not normally a fan of nuclear weapons, given these facts, I believe we need a fully independent nuclear weapon more than ever – whatever the cost to the public purse. The UK has already blown any chance of sharing nuclear warheads with France, so increased spending may be our only option. With many other nuclear and nuclear-aspiring countries rattling sabres at each other, it would be negligent of the British government not to secure our borders somehow. A nuclear deterrent exists, through the horror of mutually assured destruction, to safeguard the future of a nation.

One would hope that the UK could protect itself with conventional weapons and personnel, but recent spending cuts and planning failures have left our armed forces in a woeful condition. When Russia moved its sole aircraft carrier, the Admiral Kuznetsov, through the English Channel on its way to the Mediterranean, instead of sending destroyers to accompany her, the Royal Navy sent a tugboat, a jibe at the aging state of Russia’s fleet. Which would be funny, if it weren’t for the fact that Britain currently doesn’t have any aircraft carriers. HMS Queen Elizabeth will enter service later this year, but is not deployable until 2021. And that’s before we address the availability of the F-35 Joint Strike fighters meant to fly from her.

The prospect of nuclear war terrifies us all, but following decades of military mismanagement, Brexit Britain finds herself between a European Union drifting through turbulent waters, and the Divided States of Trumpland. Sadly, renewing Trident, and ensuring the system answers to our government alone, is essential to ensuring Britannia can ride the waves, let alone rule them.