The UK needs to re-think and clarify it’s defence strategy.
The UK thinking about defence seems as muddled as it’s thinking about other things: For example the HS2 railway plan – the benefits if it only goes to Birmingham are minimal. Another example is wind generated electricity, with no storage plan, so we have to pay the generators to turn off their electricty if it is windy at the wrong time!
So, with defence polcy, we seem to lack any clear thinking.
Defence expenditure could be for any of the following:
Preparation to invade other countries (unlikely)
Preparation to resist invasion (again unlikely, other countries would probably be invaded first).
Preparation to resist attack (a ‘bad actor’ makingt trouble, such as attacking underwater pipelines and cables) (likely, possibly coinciding with invasion of other friendly countries)
War in Europe – military support of allies
Global conflict, for example in Far East (invasion of Taiwan for example)
Our nation is somewhat distinct in military terms, given its island status.
In order to resist attack, it would seem obvious we need air cover. Maybe an ‘iron dome’ defence against missiles. Probably planes to fight off attacks from other nation’s planes.
Certainly sufficient naval resources to police and defend our coastal and offshore waters. This would include capacity against submarines as well as ships.
In terms of modern warfare, we need to be able to resist drone attacks. Imagine a ‘bad actor’ with a container ship just off our coast, maybe with a thousand drones on board. Those drones could drop poison in our reservoirs, drop grenades on public events (football stadia etc), or drop small incendiary devices in residential areas. What defence do we currently have against such a threat?
We need ‘defence drones’, maybe programmed by AI, to swarm and attack any such enemy action.
In Europe we need to talk to our allies about sufficient capacity to resist an attack (from the East) or, even better, sufficient capacity to deter such an invasion.
We need to talk to our Eastern European friends about what is needed, not the complacent French and Germans. They probably regard Eastern Europe as some sort of ‘tripwire’ to give them time to get armed if necessary.
Eastern Europe needs Tanks – lots of them – mobile guns and so on. They need aircover – maybe basic planes – ideally unmanned. Again, lots of them. Missiles, and missile defences. Likewise Drones. Personally I’d supply A10 Warhog type planes, ideally unmanned, and ‘pilotted’ from behind the front lines. Potentraiily lethal against any kind of enemy moving vehicles.
You could possibly install tactical nuclear land mines, but the ‘maginot line’ proves they can often be skirted…..
Realistically it is unlikely we can contribute much to any significant global event. My proposals above, the priorities, would stretch any likely defence expenditure. There is no money for global conflict, unless we put the economy on a war footing.
So it brings me to our two aircraft carriers. I suppose we could sail them off to the global event, presumably in American fleets. We don’t have good naval support for them, anti-submarine frigates etc., not much by way of aircraft, and poor fleet support (oil re-supply and so on). We’d denude our island defences to support them.
And what would they do when they got there? They alone would not bomb another country into submission, and they cannot invade. They would be sitting targets in the meantime. Missiles, torpedos, high altitude bombers, could destroy them.
They might have been good for ship building employment in Scotland, but at sea they are about as much use as lipstick on a pig.
They obvioulsy retain some interest and grandeur. Frankly we’d do better to keep a couple of planes on them for displays, and then use them as trade exhibition centres (including displaying and selling our defence weaponry abroad).
If we wanted to contribute globally some intercontinental missiles would have as much impact. And we could use them against Putin by threatening to destroy his Palace…..
I imagine countries like Israel have a real focus on their military priorities. And timescales.
I have written about the Ajax armed vehicle debacle. What is partly distresing is the timescale involved.
The government and the military here need to change their ways. there needs to be a real focus on costs, but even more so on timescale. We may be in a situation similar to the mid 1930s versus the start of World War 2. We should think in terms of three or four years to overhaul our military. Weapons need to come ‘off the shelf’ not custom designed in committee. Assuming we need more military personnel, the military need to recruit and train them in house (not using contractors and consultants). This puts the results under direct control so no excuses.
So, clear thinking is required, and urgent action. Is anyone up to, and up for, the challenge? Or shall we leave it until it is too late?
Leave a Reply