Speaking with Piers Morgan on Monday morning, Jeremy Corbyn’s right-hand man, John McDonnell, inadvertently explained why a Corbyn-led Labour government would be a disaster for Britain and for NATO when he described how a Corbyn government would consider authorizing the use of nuclear weapons against a hostile actor.
But first, some context here.
Whatever you think of Morgan, his questioning on this issue is utterly relevant in light of Corbyn’s longstanding belief in unilateral nuclear disarmament. It’s also relevant because Corbyn has previously been asked what he would write in the so-called “letters of last resort” orders that he would issue to British nuclear ballistic missile submarine commanders, were he ever to become prime minister. Those letters, in sealed safes on each of Britain’s four ballistic missile submarines, give commanders orders on how to respond if Britain is attacked and the government is killed. Most prime ministers, including incumbent Theresa May, are clear that they will defend Britain if attacked. Corbyn is not. His letters would tell commanders that “I want us to achieve a nuclear-free world. What I want us to do is adhere to the nuclear nonproliferation treaty and take part in negotiations surrounding that …”
But wait a minute — that’s only the context. Back to what happened on Monday, when McDonnell sought to boost Corbyn’s credibility and ended up making things worse.
Asked by Morgan how a Corbyn government would come to a decision over whether to use nuclear weapons, McDonnell responded that “within government there will be a discussion. … And the prime minister then will make the decision on the basis of the discussions that take place within Cabinet. But actually it will most probably be wider than that within Parliament and the wider community itself.”
Um … what?
Forgive me, but I’m going to venture that the British government will not be in a position to conduct public opinion polls in any scenario in which Britain was seriously considering launching its nuclear weapons. After all, such a launch would almost certainly come in response to a nuclear attack on Britain. And even if the suffered strike did not come via a multiwarhead attack from a state actor such as Russia, but rather from a terrorist group, it’s highly unlikely that the Cabinet would still be alive.
This is utterly antithetical to decades of Western nuclear strike planning. Because that planning has very rationally assumed that in the catastrophic scenario in which nuclear force was being considered, the president or prime minister would face an absolute exigency of time and threat. Namely, that unless a decision to respond was taken in very short order, that decision would be made by the enemy with further decapitating strikes. That is why, for example, the president is constantly alongside a military aide who can facilitate their use of nuclear command authority very quickly.
McDonnell’s statement is also profoundly idiotic for another reason. Because it shows utter ignorance to how foreign adversaries plan to use nuclear weapons. Because those adversaries, the Russians in particular, plan to assassinate foreign leaders in the immediate period before an attack so as to deny the Western state means of response. Again, time is of the essence in any imminent nuclear event.
Of course, none of this is terribly surprising from McDonnell. Consider that his boss, Corbyn, is anti-Semitic, a pathological anti-American, a socialist fanatic, and a man who loves terrorists and who previously worked for Iranian regime hardliners. Corbyn is also a tool of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is responsible for killing Britons on British oil. Thus, to assume that Corbyn and his cronies would be at all competent in a nuclear crisis is lunacy.
