Politics
UK urged to stop fuelling risk of accidental nuclear war
The UK has been accused of fuelling the risk of accidental nuclear war, as a former UK defence secretary signed an open letter which said modernised safeguards must be introduced into nuclear command and control systems.
Des Browne is vice chair of Nuclear Threat Initiative as well as chair of the board of trustees and directors at the European Leadership Network. He’s also a former secretary of state for Defence. He signed the letter alongside senior figures from politics, diplomacy and the military.
The letter’s publication coincided with the Munich Security Conference, which took place over the weekend of 14-15 February 2026. Leaders including UK prime minister Keir Starmer came together to discuss international defence risks.
Starmer banged the drum for rearmament, saying:
Time and again, leaders have looked the other way, only re-arming when disaster is upon them. This time, it must be different. Because all of the warning signs are there.
He added:
NATO [the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation] has warned that Russia could be ready to use military force against the Alliance by the end of this decade. In the event of a peace deal in Ukraine, which we are all working hard to achieve, Russia’s re-armament would only accelerate.
The wider danger to Europe would not end there. It would increase. So we must answer this threat in full.
Speaking about nuclear warfare strategy, Starmer said:
We are enhancing our nuclear cooperation with France.
The UK and France are the only countries with their own nuclear weapons in Europe. France’s nuclear weapons are wholly manufactured and owned domestically, whereas the UK manufactures its own warheads, but relies on the US to supply and maintain the missiles which deliver the warheads.
Some other European countries host US-owned and controlled tactical nuclear weapons.
Starmer continued:
For decades the UK has been the only nuclear power in Europe to commit its deterrent to protect all NATO members. But now any adversary must know that in a crisis they could be confronted by our combined strength.
Likelihood of nuclear weapons use is growing – international security experts
Other signatories of the letter included:
- Nuclear Threat Initiative president and CEO and former US secretary of the army Christine E Wormuth.
- Nuclear Threat Initiative founding co-chair and former US senator Sam Nunn.
- Nuclear Threat Initiative co-chair and former US secretary of energy Ernest J Moniz.
- Munich Security Conference Foundation Council president and former ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger.
A total of 75 people signed the letter, including former secretaries of state, ministers, generals, admirals, and ambassadors, as well as senior policy experts from a wide range of countries across continents.
The statement said:
Safeguards essential to preventing nuclear catastrophe for nearly eight decades are now being tested by disruptive technologies, heightened geopolitical tensions, and the erosion of arms control.
The danger that a terrible decision may be made to use nuclear weapons in a moment of crisis is growing.
It went on to:
call on all countries that possess nuclear weapons to strengthen their safeguards to prevent unauthorized, inadvertent, or mistaken use of a nuclear weapon, including through accidental escalation or false warning of an attack.
This process could include internal nuclear ‘fail-safe’ reviews. Such strengthened national safeguards would be effective unilateral nuclear risk-reduction measures, not requiring any negotiation, treaty, or verification.
They could also motivate and inform new dialogues on arms control, nuclear risk reduction, and confidence-building measures, which are a necessity as global nuclear forces and threats grow.
The letter added:
Preventing accidental or mistaken nuclear use is also a moral imperative, directly linked to the protection of civilian populations.
UK urged to support modernised nuclear weapons safeguards
The statement from the nuclear security experts called on the UK, as one of five nuclear weapons states under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), to publicly commit to modernised safeguards.
Those five states – the US, Russia, China, UK and France, are also the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, referred to as the P5.
The statement said:
Most immediately, the five nuclear-weapons states under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) should consider making a Joint Statement in support of nuclear fail-safe connected to the NPT Review Conference beginning in April 2026, as a demonstration of their commitment to prevent the unauthorised or unintended use of nuclear weapons.
Such a statement would reinforce the important January 2022 P5 declaration that a nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought, and would help reduce the risks of miscalculation and escalation in an increasingly complex security environment. It should be welcomed by all non-nuclear weapons states.
All nuclear-armed states should take immediate action to prevent a possible catastrophe. The world cannot afford to wait for more peaceful times to reduce the risks of nuclear use.
As a member of the P5, the UK was recently accused of “sitting on the sidelines” for failing to use its diplomatic influence to pressure the US and Russia to extend their participation in New START – a treaty designed to limit the number of large nuclear weapons held by the two countries, and which expired earlier in February 2026.
A Ministry of Defence spokesperson told the Canary:
We have absolute confidence in the safety, security and reliability of the United Kingdom’s nuclear deterrent.
A government source added that the UK’s nuclear weapons systems have inherent safety features in their designs which render them safe until such a time as they may be used.
The UK has taken certain unilateral actions to reduce tensions such as not targeting missiles at a specific state since 1994, and keeping nuclear-armed submarines at several days’ notice to fire, the source pointed out.
That contrasts with some nuclear weapons in the US and Russia which can launch within seconds, minutes or hours.
According to the source, the UK government is committed to working with nuclear and non-nuclear weapons states, including those who threaten the UK’s interests, to build trust, confidence, transparency and mutual understanding, with the aim of reducing the risk of nuclear war.
Nuclear weapons states must stop expanding arsenals – CND
The Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND) called on the US and Russia to take political leadership on international nuclear disarmament.
CND general secretary Sophie Bolt told the Canary:
This statement is a welcome contribution to pressuring nuclear weapons states to move away from modernising and expanding their nuclear weapons, and instead towards taking action to stop the risks of nuclear war.
Ultimately, if we are to see a halt to this new nuclear arms race that means the US and Russia – as the biggest nuclear weapons states – taking the political leadership to actively reduce nuclear tensions by continuing to abide by New START.
It means the ratification by all nuclear weapons states of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty and the active engagement in the process of disarmament as laid out in the NPT.
UK fuelling risk of accidental nuclear war – campaigner
The International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) accused the UK of fuelling nuclear risk with its nuclear weapons arsenal.
ICAN director of programmes Susi Snyder told the Canary:
It is welcome that [UK defence secretary] Mr Healey recognises the nuclear we face, but he fails to acknowledge his own government’s part in creating and fuelling that risk.
When a country relies on nuclear weapons in its defence strategy, it contributes to the risk of nuclear weapons being used – including accidentally.
The increased danger with the end of the New START agreement is an excellent moment to draw attention to those risks, and to the reality that the only way to eliminate the risks from nuclear weapons, is to eliminate nuclear weapons, something the UK and others are obliged to do under the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and the global majority of countries have reaffirmed in the Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons (TPNW).
The United Nations is currently producing a scientific assessment of just what consequences we can expect from a nuclear war, yet Britain voted against doing such a study, saying that we do not need new information to change our collective understanding of the horror of a nuclear war.
Actions speak louder than words, and while opposing updating our understanding of what is at stake, the UK is also contributing to increased nuclear risks by not publicly opposing the argument we heard at the Munich Security Conference over the past few days that Europe needs more nuclear weapons to protect itself, as well as by continuing to invest upwards of £8bn per year in its own nuclear arsenal.
Featured image via the Canary