Thoughts on the reported Trident failure

/1 How on earth HMG/MOD thought they’d get away with covering up a failure with the Defence Sec & 1SL on board, with the launch announced beforehand, is beyond me. Why not get in front of the story?

/2

In this earlier thread I discussed Putin’s nuclear signalling. There have now been several articles and longish Twitter threads by think tankers and academics on the nuclear dimension of this war and I thought it might be helpful to collect them. Here goes :🧵

https://twitter.com/harries_matthew/status/1498270107864383489

[Note: it’s hard to summarise people’s thoughts at tweet length without mischaracterising them, so I will just order this by date. I will also miss lots of important things - please add them by replying]

Some thoughts on Putin’s nuclear signalling. [THREAD] 1. The risks of nuclear escalation from Russia’s invasion are real and should be taken seriously. This has been known from the outset and is a primary reason why the West is not intervening directly with military force.

🧵 Naval nuclear propulsion and non-proliferation/safeguards, a reading list:

(I'm assembling this for myself but thought I would tweet in case useful to anyone else. Please reply with anything I've missed!)

/1 The @FAScientists Naval Nuclear Propulsion Project produced several studies on this topic from 2014-17, incl @laura_rockwood on IAEA safeguards, @MatiasSpektor on Brazil, @DrNickRitchie on the UK, a consensus report, and several journal articles. Link: fas.org/naval-nuclear-… /2