Reading my nice shiny Scotland's Future handout, I was gob-smacked by the absence of the dreaded "T" word.
Of all the reasons for being proud of the Scottish Government, none is greater than its rejection of Trident.
This is its trump card in the referendum, and it is not being played. Apart from saving on the colossal running costs, and the £100 billion for its replacement, rejection is the only principled position to take on nuclear weapons of mass destruction (WMD).
Nor is it a question of "not in my back yard". As John Ainslie demonstrated in his meticulously researched report Trident - Nowhere To Go, the boats cannot operate from anywhere in the UK other than the Coulport/Faslane complex. Following Scottish independence, the British Government can make a virtue out of necessity and quietly disarm its nuclear WMD, or it can huff and puff as hard as it can. But it cannot force Trident on a Scotland which has outlawed nuclear weapons in a written constitution. Either way, Trident is toast.
A new democratic Scotland can play a leading role in promoting an international treaty outlawing nuclear weapons, and join the majority of the world's states, which want this. We can abandon the politics of power and domination that have characterised Britain's imperial history, and build an alternative polity of sharing, social justice, co-operation and peace. In opposing Trident, the Scottish Government has taken the first step towards building a new society.
As Thomas Paine said: "We have it in our power to begin the world over again."
Overthrowing the obscene state idol of Trident will be the genesis of a new beginning for Scotland, and a beacon of hope for humanity.
Brian Quail
Glasgow
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article