AS THE 2024 election date approaches, Scottish CND and the wider Scottish peace movement are raising issues relating to nuclear weapons and military spending with candidates up and down the country.

Scottish CND has recently produced a summary of the position of some political parties on nuclear weapons issues.

The summary makes interesting reading.

The SNP policy is to remove nuclear weapons from Scottish territory in the event of independence.

However, the party also indicates support for an independent Scotland joining Nato, which seems a contradictory position given that Nato is a nuclear weapons led organisation.

As legendary Scottish CND figure the late John Ainslie said, Nato is likely to do all it can to hinder and hamper an independent Scotland from getting rid of its nuclear weapons.

The Scottish Green Party has indicated clear opposition to nuclear weapons. The Greens also say that  the party would look to amending the Marine Scotland Act to include a ban on the movement of nuclear weapons through Scottish waters.

The Greens also say that they would end government support for businesses involved in supply chain for the Trident nuclear weapons system.

However, in relation to the dreadful war in Ukraine we have had statements from a number of leading Green Party figures supporting the supply of arms to Ukraine rather than giving priority to arguing a sensible case for negotiations focused on ending the killing on both sides.

I think  political parties such as the Greens, who identify as pro-peace parties, should always remember the words of the late Harry Patch who was the last surviving soldier of WWI and famously said: “Wars always finish with sitting down and talking. Why the devil don’t they do that beforehand?”

Disappointingly Labour Party leader Keir Starmer has said his commitment to Britain’s nuclear weapons system is unshakeable and absolute.

Starmer has also recently said he wants to raise defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP as soon as resources allow. Not unexpectedly the Tory policy is to have a continuous, at sea, presence of nuclear weapons-armed submarines.

The Tory policy position also includes solid support for Nato —particularly supporting its multinational rapid response force.

When one looks at the enthusiasm of Starmer’s Labour and the Tories in terms of support for nuclear weapons, it is deeply depressing.

Even Tony Blair said of Trident in his memoirs: “The expense is huge — and the utility is non-existent in military terms.”

Scottish CND have also provided information on the current policy position of the Liberal Democrats who would appear to be in favour of what they call a minimum credible nuclear deterrent.

However, they also have a position which appears to support at least one nuclear weapons-armed submarine being continuously at sea, while simultaneously saying that they are committed to multilateral global disarmament.

Not for the first time it seems to me and a number of people in the peace movement that the Lib Dems want a middle-of-the-road position on nuclear weapons. The  problem is that if you stay in the middle of the road too long you get stuck and make no progress at all.

On the positive side, and I was well aware of this during my stint as Scottish CND chair, smaller parties such as the Communist Party of Britain, the Socialist Labour Party and the Scottish Socialist Party all take clear and sensible positions in terms of opposition to nuclear weapons and excessive military spending.

Therefore, as you look across the political parties functioning in Scotland the policy positions on nuclear weapons and military spending are a mixed bag.

Hopefully people will consider the policies of these parties carefully before they cast their vote. I think following the suggestion by Scottish CND to only vote for candidates opposed to nuclear weapons is very useful advice.

After the election we will continue to live in dangerous times. That is why it is important  that organisations such as the Rethinking Security Network are given more prominence in peace movement campaigning.

Back in 2015 a paper from this network said: “The proper goal of security should be grounded in the wellbeing of people in their social and ecological context, rather than in the interests of a nation state as determined by an elite.”

Excessive defence spending in particular takes resources away from other sectors of the economy. Research by the Brown University in the US found that investing in areas such as education and health will create many more jobs than investing in the defence sector.

However, as well as  generating jobs, spending more on education and the NHS also has a positive effect on the lives of communities and the wellbeing of individuals.

Now is the time for the Scottish peace movement and our sister organisations across the UK to redouble our efforts in arguing the case against ever-increasing defence spending.

In these troubled times Scottish CND and CND across Britain are needed more than ever.

Arthur West is the former chair of Scottish CND and current secretary of Ayrshire CND.