The government is splitting hairs to avoid scrutiny of its nuclear weapons programme, with a minister suggesting that Britain isn’t expanding its nuclear capabilities beyond its “existing submarine-based system” based in Scotland.
Minister of State for Defence Readiness and Industry Luke Pollard’s comments were made in a written answer to Liberal Democrat MP Cameron Thomas, who had asked what assessment had the government made “of the viability of the purchase” of nuclear-capable F-35As “as an expansion of the UK nuclear deterrent in the context of the US National Security Strategy.”
Pollard responded that the purchase of at least 12 F-35A fighter aircraft would be to allow Britain to participate in NATO’s Dual Capable Aircraft (DCA) nuclear mission and that the nuclear weapons attached to the mission “are United States (US) nuclear weapons and the US retains control and custody over them.”
He added:
“The Government has no plans to expand the UK nuclear deterrent beyond our existing submarine-based system but continues to keep its nuclear posture under constant review in light of the international security environment and the actions of potential adversaries.”
But when Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced in June 2025 that Britain would buy the F-35As, which will be based at RAF Marham in Norfolk, the government said the deal represented the “biggest strengthening of the UK’s nuclear posture in a generation” and would complement its existing submarine-launched systems.
It added that the deal “reintroduces a nuclear role for the Royal Air Force for the first time since the UK retired its sovereign air-launched nuclear weapons following the end of the Cold War.”
Under NATO’s DCA nuclear mission, RAF pilots will fly F-35As based at Marham to conduct nuclear strikes with US bombs during a nuclear war, undertaking regular training for such an eventuality during NATO war games.
The British F-35A jets based at RAF Marham will be close to RAF Lakenheath in Suffolk where the US has its own F-35As deployed, and where flights believed to be carrying B61-12 nuclear bombs landed last summer.
Public Accounts Committee concerns
While Pollard claims Britain isn’t expanding its nuclear weapons programme, the Public Accounts Committee has raised serious concerns over the F-35A purchase and the additional costs associated with being part of NATO nuclear sharing mission, calling them “unrealistic”. In its report into the wider F-35 programme, which include non-nuclear F-35Bs for the Royal Navy, it raised serious concerns about the additional financially burden of purchasing the F-35As and preparing pilots for a nuclear mission and the programme’s skyrocketing costs.
Britain’s participation in the F-35 programme initially sought to purchase non-nuclear F-35Bs, with the Ministry of Defence initially submitting projections for 48 jets at a cost of £18.4 billion, not for the full order of 138. Upon the extension of the programme from 2048 to 2069, they later revised the figure to £57 billion but did not include any of the far more costly sustainment expenditure such as personnel, infrastructure or fuel. The National Audit Office now estimates that the F-35 programme will cost £71 billion but this does not include costs associated with certification of the F-35A jets for NATO nuclear missions.
Now that the F-35A is part of Britain’s programme, the initial 12 ordered could rise to 75 A variants capable of delivering nuclear weapons. Questions remain whether these additional 63 F-35As will be part of NATO’s nuclear mission.
Not so independent
While the government has made no bones over the fact that the F-35As will be under NATO command in the event of a nuclear war, they regularly claim that Britain’s submarine-launched nuclear weapons are “sovereign” or “independent,” similarly assigned to the defence of NATO but operationally under the command of the Prime Minister.
But the Trident II D5 nuclear missiles are leased from a poll shared with the US Navy and rely heavily on US support to remain operational. Around a dozen special nuclear flights from the US land at RAF Brize Norton every year with nuclear convoys brining material between the Oxfordshire air base, AWE Aldermaston, and up to Faslane and Coulport naval bases in Scotland.
CND General Secretary Sophie Bolt said:
“Pollard’s splitting of hairs over Britain’s nuclear expansion is nothing more than a poor attempt to avoid Parliamentary scrutiny and avoid discussing Britain’s role in the belligerent foreign policy of Donald Trump. As outlined in the PAC report, the F-35A purchase was announced without any due diligence as to the costs or requirements and MPs have not had an opportunity to debate or vote on the RAF’s new nuclear role.
For almost 70 years, Britain’s status as a nuclear power has been underpinned by the US-UK Mutual Defence Agreement – shamefully extended indefinitely by Starmer’s government in 2024 – which leaves our security beholden to the whims of a US president and NATO. Britain’s nuclear capabilities have never been truly independent whether they’re sea- or air-launched.”
Learn more about Britain’s nuclear expansion in the context of Trump’s escalating military aggression in our upcoming webinar, Stopping Trump’s global war and new nuclear dangers, on Thursday 29 January from 7pm.