WEB SPECIAL - Defence Cuts

THE CRAVEN FOLLY OF UK DEFENCE CUTS
WARSHIPS IFR OPINION SPECIAL

The British Defence Review of late 2003 was couched in techno-babble, for it cleaved to the high-tech 'Transformational' warfare. Concepts such as sea-basing, the need for high-tech surveillance and for the co-operative engagement of naval weapons are sound, but they are not a substitute for numbers (and the highly trained people who can interact with local populations). Future warfare will require sufficient numbers of ships and vehicles and aircraft, and, MOST IMPORTANTLY men and women. Navies, and marines, are well suited to their traditional roles of littoral and expeditionary warfare, and effective in suppressing piracy and smuggling, and have significant functions to fulfil during port visits in which they perform Defence Diplomacy.

The Type 23 frigate HMS Norfolk, retired from service early and probably sold-off to a foreign friendly navy as part of the UK Government's latest defence cuts. Photo: Nick Newns.

These tasks need numbers, but the budgetary reality is rather different. In Britain, the Royal Navy's destroyer and frigate force has been reduced to 25, whereas only a few years ago 50 was deemed the minimum. This seems bizarre.

Having won the Cold War and a number of small wars since, as well as being the only 'civil servants' able to fulfil Government policy, it is nothing short of scandalous that the UK defence budget should take such large hits. The gibberish spouted by the Defence White Paper was a smokescreen for plundering the defences of Britain to pour more money into the inefficient, bloated National Health Service and other more politically lucrative vote-delivering areas. It is also a means by the which the Treasury can chape Foreign and Defence policies, which is surely not its remit at all - if the UK Armed Forces are denied the funds to pursue true expeditionary warfare then obviously Britain cannot become involved in any further adventures like the Iraq War of 2003.

AT a time when the submarine menace around the world is growing, when supersonic sea-skimming missiles are a formidable threat, when deep-strike cruise missiles are THE weapon of influence, and aircraft carriers have proved to be the ultimate platforms for exerting influence, a foolhardy and reckless British government is getting rid of the very frigates, destroyers, Sea Harriers, and nuclear-powered attack submarines that are needed to meet those dangers.

It just so happens those same ships and aircraft are also useful for a wide range of low intensity warfare missions, too.

The older Type 22 frigate HMS Chatham, which is to be retained in the fleet due to her powerful command-and-control capabilities. Photo: Nick Newns.

The Treasury under Gordon Brown - a hard-nosed Chancellor well known to be no friend of the military, except when it comes to keeping the Rosyth naval dockyard (in his own constituency) going, despite it being declared surplus to requirements a decade ago - aims to get its way. Its objective is to employ several hundred thousand more civil servants of dubious worth to Britain (although of course they will probably vote in favour of the government that gave them their jobs).

There were few signs that a Defence Minister crippled by the Hutton Inquiry or a Prime Minister entangled in Iraq did much to save the UK Armed Forces from 'Iron Chancellor' Gordon Brown's axe. From the UK government there were the usual weak statements about defence spending in real terms going up, but this was, to coin a phrase, utter claptrap. Since 1990 Tory and Labour governments have inflicted a death by a thousand cuts on the UK Armed Forces, telling the British public the world is a safer place in which a never-ending 'peace dividend' can be harvested. The Tories, who could have made great capital about Labour's desertion of the Armed Forces at a time when they are waging a global 'War on Terrorism' emasculated themselves, as they have done on so many issues, by declaring with stunning stupidity that they would follow Labour's defence spending strategy (or absence of it) if elected to Government next year. As with Iraq, the Tories continue to alienate their natural supporters and show themselves to be flip-floppers of the greatest magnitude. Meanwhile the Liberal Democrats, who will say anything to get elected, make big noises about saving the RAF's Battle of Britain Memorial Flight from the axe. Big deal.

MEANWHILE, soldiers and airmen, the most Value For Money civil servants in the UK, do, of course, vote - with their feet, by leaving the Armed Forces when they have been fully-trained and have reached the peak of performance. They are deciding, after more than a decade of morale-sapping cuts, that they cannot continue to serve on endless deployments (entailing long periods of separation from family and home), risking their lives for a Prime Minister who has seemed readier to use force than many of his predecessors. On top of being asked to die for their country abroad, these young men and women have been expected to endure their pitiful rates of pay to fill in for better paid striking firemen, fighting on the home front in Mr Blair's civil wars with Trades Unions. Sweat, treasure and, regrettably, blood have been spent in achieving a succession of victories abroad, while parsimony at home has often put the lives of sailors and marines (and British interests) at risk. The fleet was well-balanced, but there are great risks - as this magazine has remarked before - in selling off anymore destroyers and frigates in order to buy a new generation of carriers. There are many who doubt that those carriers will ever be built. The past record of Labour governments is not good on this score. It was a Labour government that withdrew Britain from 'East of Suez' and cancelled orders for a new generation of super-carriers in the late 1960s. Will Gordon Brown do the same if he replaces Tony Blair? It is highly possible and it will be a decision of the greatest folly, providing yet more evidence that politicians of all parties in the UK are a craven bunch who would risk the security of the State to buy votes in other areas of public spending.

Meanwhile, the Eurofighter programme - a disgusting multi-billion pound waste of money - goes forward because the current UK government lacks the courage to take the right decision. Axe the Eurofighter NOW and order the new carriers TODAY.

POLITICIANS of all parties in the UK appear to be ignorant of what maritime power means or provides for Britain (or they pretend to be, because it costs money they would rather spend on other projects). Britain must make the right choice, between being part of an upstart European super-state or of a liberal Anglophone global alliance that polices the world. In other words, whether it is to be a maritime power or a Continental one. The mood in Britain is shifting away from Europe, and it is now time to invest more, not less, in Britain's traditional strengths. That means a strong Royal Navy. The Nation that invests in its navy is gifted influence in the world, and economic power. Just look at Britain between 1805 and 1914, or the USA from WW2 to the present and look at how China and India (the emerging super-powers) are building big fleets. Recently a minister in the current British government told a TV interviewer that Tony Blair had clout and influence on the world stage. He gave the impression that somehow the Prime Minister came by this almost by Divine Right and that it would be foolish to throw this great Statesman away over the troubles in Iraq. What gives Mr Blair, or President Bush or any other 'World Statesman' that clout and influence is a strong Navy, without which both the politician and the country are enfeebled on the world stage. Politicians come and go, but navies always control the earth and its resources. By the same measure, they can also enforce law and order, and provide humanitarian aid and disaster relief. Naval forces can, in short, be a major Force for Good. You don't have to be a rocket scientist to work that out. Apparently it is beyond the intelligence of British politicians...

For subsequent profiles in this series, buy WARSHIPS IFR magazine.