Peter Hitchens has sparked a fresh debate on Britain’s defence priorities, urging the government to abandon the Trident nuclear programme and replace it with a domestic version of Israel’s Iron Dome. he contends that the looming retirement of Vanguard‑class boats and the £31 billion price tag of the new Dreadnought‑class submarines are unsustainable in a world dominated by drones and precision missiles.

The £31 billion price tag of the Dreadnought‑class subs

The Dreadnought‑class submarines being built at Barrow‑in‑Furness are projected to cost around £31 billion, with official estimates for the full replacement ranging from £20 billion to £34 billion. campaign for Nuclear Disarmament figures suggest the total could swell to £205 billion when lifecycle costs are included.. According to the source, Hitchens describes this spending as a “mountain of wealth” that yields little taangible security.

Iron Dome as a British alternative: feasibility and cost

Hitchens proposes a home‑grown Iron Dome‑style anti‑missile system, arguing that it would address the rise of drone warfare and long‑range precision strikes highlighted by the conflicts in Ukraine and Iran. He suggests that a “high‑quality sky defence system” paired with a modest stockpile of conventional free‑fall bombs would be more practical than a nuclear deterrent that may never be used. While the column does not provide a concrete budget, it cites Israel’s own deployment as proof of concept.

Astute‑class submarines grounded by technical faults

Recent reports reveal that all five of the Royal Navy’s Astute‑class nuclear submarines have been unable to deploy due to maintenance failures and technical glitches. This systemic issue, noted in the source, underscores Hitchens’s claim that the current naval strategy is “ambitious but unreliable.” The grounding of these vessels raises questions about the operational readiness of Britain’s existing underwater fleet.

Hitchens’ claim that Russia could target London with missiles

Hitchens warns that Russia possesses the missile capability to strike NATO capitas, including London , and that the UK is “essentially defenseless” under the current Trident‑centric framework. He links this vulnerability to the covert missile strikes being launched from Ukrainian territory against Russian oil infrastructure, arguing that an Iron Dome‑type shield would provide a critical layer of protection that a submerged nuclear submarine cannot.

Who would fund a UK‑made Iron Dome system?

The column leaves open the question of financing: would the Ministry of Defence allocate funds from the Trident budget, or would a new parliamentary appropriation be required? Additionally, the source does not identify any domestic defence contractors ready to produce such a system , nor does it address potential export‑control hurdles. These gaps highlight the speculative nature of Hitchens’s proposal.