Tribune leader, 17 May 1981
Last week's admission by the Ministry of Defence that 50 workers at the nuclear submarine base at Faslane have received doses of radiation above official safety limits is extremely worrying.
The workers have been exposed to excessive radiation because cracks have appeared hi the cooling systems of the nuclear reactors hi Britain's first-generation nuclear-powered submarines – among them the four Polaris boats that constitute Britain's "independent nuclear deterrent".
These cracks need to be repaired if the submarines are to be kept hi service, and there are few workers willing and able to do the job. Those employed are being worked right up to radiation-exposure limits and sometimes well beyond, at severe risk to themselves and to the health of their children and their children's children.
The reason for this is simple. The Trident nuclear-missile submarine programme, which is supposed to replace Polaris, is running behind schedule because the Atomic Weapons Research Establishment at Aldermaston is having severe difficulties with the warheads. If Britain is to maintain without a gap the independent nuclear deterrent, the lifespan of the Polaris boats must be extended until Trident is ready. But is this really worth the risk of ever-increasing exposure of repair workers to radiation?
Tribune, which has long considered British nuclear forces to have no role except that of deluding the British people into thinking that their country is still a major player on the world stage, believes that it is not. But in current international conditions one does not have to be a convinced unilateralist to take such a position.
SOUTH AFRICAN JUSTICE
The six-year prison sentence imposed on Winnie Mandela this week creates problems for the African National Congress, but it would be a mistake to exaggerate them. The credibility of the ANC will inevitably suffer some short-term damage among those, black and white, who believe Mrs Mandela to be guilty, and in the short term the beneficiary will be F W de Klerk's white government, which has an interest in weakening the ANC to extract concessions in negotiations over the future of South Africa.
But Mr de Klerk knows that he needs ANC participation hi the talks if his promises to end apartheid are to have any international credibility, and he knows that time is not on his side. The outcome of the trial will inevitably give added impetus to the already growing pressure on the ANC to withdraw from negotiations with the Government. With reason, black South Africans do not trust apartheid justice. Whatever the truth of the matter, many believe Mrs Mandela to be the innocent victim of a state frame-up, and take the verdict and sentence of proof that nothing has really changed hi the Government's attitude. Mr de Klerk may have to make concessions to keep the ANC talking.
