THE BIG INTERVIEW

Admiral Sir Alan West,
First Sea Lord & Chief of the Naval Staff

Warships IFR Editor Iain Ballantyne talks to the UK's First Sea Lord, Admiral Sir Alan West, about where he thinks the RN stands in 2003. The interview took place as the RN deployed its biggest war-fighting task group in twenty years to confron Saddam.

Admiral Sir Alan West, First Sea Lord & Chief of the Naval Staff. Photo: Royal Navy.

BIOGRAPHICAL

Admiral West joined the Navy in 1965 and has spent the majority of his career at sea, serving in 14 different ships and commanding three of them.

In 1980 he was promoted to Commander and took command of the frigate HMS Ardent, which was part of the British task force ordered to the South Atlantic in 1982. Ardent was sunk on May 21, during the campaign that evicted Argentinean invaders from the Falkland Islands. The Type 21 frigate was sailing through Falkland Sound, having carried out a shore bombardment. Four Argentinean A4 Skyhawks attacked her, with three 500 lbs bombs hitting the ship, two of them going off. On fire, the Ardent limped to San Carlos Water. There she was attacked by another three A4s, suffering more bomb hits. With the frigate now beyond saving, her CO ordered his crew to abandon ship. Twenty-two of the 201 people aboard had become casualties. The rest were taken off by HMS Yarmouth, with Cdr West the last to leave the Ardent. Alan West was subsequently awarded the Distinguished Service Cross for his part in the action. Promoted to Rear Admiral in February 1994, in February 1996 he became Commander United Kingdom Task Group and was almost permanently deployed in one of the RN's carriers. Promoted to Vice Admiral in October 1997, Admiral West was appointed as Chief of Defence Intelligence. Promotion to Admiral came in November 2000 when he took up the post of Commander-in-Chief Fleet, NATO Commander-in-Chief East Atlantic and NATO Commander Allied Naval Forces North. During this period as C-in-C, Admiral West reorganised the Fleet Headquarters. He also organised the RN's response in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the USA. This involved major maritime deployments in the northern Indian Ocean and sending Royal Marines into Afghanistan. Appointed as First Sea Lord and Chief of the Naval Staff in September 2002, Admiral West is a member of the Defence Council and Admiralty Board. He is also the First and Principal Naval Aide-de-Camp to Her Majesty The Queen.

Admiral West in desert combats during a visit to front line troops. Photo: Royal Navy.

THE INTERVIEW

When did you assume office as First Sea Lord?

"I took over on September 17 last year and the past five months have gone by very fast."

How well did your previous job, as Commander-in-Chief Fleet, prepare you for your current position?

"It equips you very well for the operational side of this job - the preparation of forces and the employment of them. The other side of being Chief of the Naval Staff and First Sea Lord involves high policy and the consideration of resources across the whole field of defence. As C-in-C Fleet you concentrate on managing your own resources. Now I have responsibility for the whole of the Royal Navy and I am involved in the management board for the whole of the Armed Forces. One way of summing up my job is to say that I am responsible for the fighting effectiveness of the Royal Navy and morale of its people and delivering its capabilities to the United Kingdom."

How well is the Royal Navy meshed with the other two Armed Forces?

"There is no doubt that in the UK we are a long way down the Joint path. And, of the three armed services in the UK, the Royal Navy has found it easier to work in a Joint way because it has always had its own air force, in the Fleet Air Arm, and its own 'army', in the Royal Marines. It has therefore been easier for us to slip into the correct mindset. And, of course, the Navy's Maritime Contribution to Joint Operations is a very important element of the UK's current national defence strategy."

How would you assess the RN's 'bill of health', so to speak, as you begin your term as First Sea Lord?

"I think the Royal Navy is in a very good condition. I think, first of all, that we have some very fine ships, aircraft and equipment in today's front line fleet. And the Navy has an equipment programme in progress that is its biggest since I joined the Royal Navy 37 years ago. There are inevitably some niggles about things, but on the whole the health of the RN is good."

What are the highlights of the equipment programme?

"We have the two future carriers, the CVFs, as the centre-piece, then there are the Type 45 destroyers coming along. It is the biggest shipbuilding programme in Europe. We have the LPDs - Albion, which will be joining the fleet by July this year, and her sister ship Bulwark next year. Then there are the four Landing Ship Dock Auxiliaries that are replacing the Landing Ship Logistics, but which are substantially bigger and more capable. And then there is the Merlin helicopter, with one squadron operational and another about to come on line. In my opinion it is the best Anti-Submarine Warfare helicopter in the world."

Are you a hundred per cent certain it will all come to fruition?

"You do have to be careful that it isn't all 'jam tomorrow' and of course you have to work hard to ensure that you will have the well-trained, highly motivated people you need to crew all these new ships. And, of course, the capabilities of the existing fleet also need to be invested in too.

It is not an easy balance to maintain. For example, we have had difficulties with Sea Wolf missiles. But we have got around them and I am now very happy with Sea Wolf. There have also been problems with the Spearfish heavy-weight torpedoes that our submarines are armed with, but they are now fine."

I don't suppose there is a Chief of the Naval Staff who wouldn't say yes to more resources?

"You are right. We are experiencing pressure on resources and this shows in areas such as soft-kill systems - jammers, decoys, etc - but we can get them up to scratch when we need to. The Navy can always benefit from more money but, there are so many other demands on Government funds that we are competing with."

Turning to force levels...are you concerned about the still declining number of escorts?

"It is a question of quantity versus quality. The lower the numbers go, the more important it becomes to tap into innovations such as Network Centric Warfare. This demands connectivity and the capability to disseminate information and act on it quickly. These things are perhaps not thought of as 'sexy', but you need them to get the most out of what you have. But, it is true that no matter how good a ship is, it can only be in so many places at any one time. Like Nelson two hundred years ago, I would like to have more escorts, but it is a question of balancing current commitments with future requirements. For example, I have to consider what is the minimum number of escorts I can have to enable me to ensure the Royal Navy will be able to build and bring into service, the CVFs?"

Do you think some of the worries people have with regard to declining escort numbers might also be a problem of perception, in that they don't understand the roles and full capabilities of modern 'escorts'?

"Yes. We are not talking about frigates and destroyers in the World War Two mould. The destroyers and frigates of today can be compared to the cruisers of the past, both in size and in role. The 32 frigates and destroyers of the RN in 2003 are major platforms that are highly capable, but that isn't to say I do not have concerns about the fine line between ships and commitments. For example, particularly in an era where the maritime terrorist threat is a clear and present danger, it does concern me that we may be over-stretched to provide escorts for looking after high-value units and shipping. But, we are looking at a range of options to tackle this."

Bearing in mind the demands of today, and the fact that you are unlikely to get a dramatic increase in numbers in the future, are the new warships going to provide higher availability allied with increased Network Centric capability?

"The Type 45s will be big ships capable of long endurance and they will need to have connectivity to get the most out of them. They are being designed and built to enable them to be kept at sea for over 300 days a year, so their utility will be much better. A Type 12 frigate of 30 years ago used to get 100 days a year at sea.... so, you can see that we are pushing back the boundaries in that respect."

Is the Royal Navy planning to follow a similar track to the US Navy - keeping the ships deployed and changing the crews in location?

"Whether we rotate a ship's crew...or just a part of the crew, like the Ops Room staff...whether we would do that hasn't quite been worked out. The survey vessel HMS Scott has been a pioneer in terms of new practices, with some of her sailors being swapped over while she remains deployed for long periods. Experience with Scott has obviously been useful, but she has a much smaller crew and a different working pattern to a destroyer."

Will keeping ships at sea for much longer periods extend across the whole future fleet?

"I can tell you that the future carriers will spend more time at sea than today's. This is necessary because we will have two carriers instead of three, although the new ships will be vastly more capable than today's Invincible Class."

The numbers game again?

"You cannot drive the numbers down too much, or you may not be able to meet commitments, but you can build increased availability into new ships."

Are you looking beyond even the Type 45s and CVFs?

"The next thing we are looking at is the Future Surface Combatant, which will be the Type 23 frigate successor, but we haven't gone too far down that path. In the 21st Century it is a case of looking at capabilities above all else rather than just ship designs. Can a satellite or an aircraft provide the necessary capability...or must it be a ship? It is only after you have decided that it should be a ship that you consider issues such as whether it should be a trimaran or a single hull design."

Bearing in mind the need for today's RN to project power ashore, is there any particular capability that you feel the Type 45s should have?

"Well, they are Anti-Air Warfare ships that will therefore definitely have the Principal Anti-Air Missile System with SAMPSON radar, but I would also like to see the Type 45s equipped with the new Tactical Tomahawk land-attack missile. But, that is something that will need to be the subject of an informed debate before any decision can be made."

There has been a great deal of discussion in the UK about the new carriers contract that was placed at the end of January, particularly about the merits of the two competing companies. Did you have a preferred bidder?

"What matters to me is that the Royal Navy gets the first carrier by 2012. Who builds the ships is neither here nor there. The work will be done in the UK. That was a feature of both bids...so, whoever won, it was good news for UK Ltd."

But, will the programme go to completion? Three billion pounds is a lot of money and, as you mentioned earlier, there are a lot of rival demands on the public purse.

"The Government is absolutely wedded to this. The CVF programme was the centrepiece of the 1998 Strategic Defence Review, which defined Britain's defence strategy as maritime-led. And everything happening in the world right now - the so-called War on Terrorism and the need to exert military pressure on Saddam Hussein - demonstrates the absolute necessity for large aircraft carriers. I only wish we had them today."

You are absolutely convinced it will happen?

"The Government will go the distance and build them. I am looking forward to establishing the parameters of the vessels later this year and the actual act of ordering their construction in 2004."

Some defence analysts might look at the Astute Class nuclear-powered attack submarine programme and compare it with the US Navy's Seawolfs - in other words three large, expensive boats that turn out to be the only ones in their class, because they are too expensive and complex to build in any greater number. Do you agree?

"No. We are not in the same arena as Seawolf at all. The Astutes are being built at a very reasonable price, bearing in mind what they deliver. Price-wise there is no comparison with Seawolf. We have ordered three Astutes so far and it is no secret that BAE SYSTEMS have been experiencing some problems in delivering them to the dates we hoped they would. However, I see no reason why we will not embark on a full programme of building five Astutes to replace all the Swiftsure Class boats. I would hope that we will enhance the Astutes as we go along so that, although this is not decided yet, we would replace the entire attack submarine fleet."

So, the Royal Navy is committed to nuclear-powered boats, rather than, for example, Air-Independent Propulsion SSKs?

"At some stage we may decide the capability we require from our hunter-killer submarines can be met in some other way, whether that be AIP submarine or an aircraft. As far as I can see, the nuclear-powered submarine is a battle-winner. There are only a few navies that will dare to stay at sea if an SSN is out and they are the ones that also have them.

A nuclear submarine is the only type of war vessel you can send somewhere a serious air threat exists and retain the ability to both remain covert and maximise capabilities."

And, of course, the ability of SSNs to exert influence on events ashore has been amply demonstrated in recent years...

"The deployment of the Trafalgar Class SSN HMS Triumph to the Arabian Sea in 2001 was a prime example of the amazing flexibility of nuclear-powered attack submarines. On September 11, when the terrorists struck New York and Washington D.C., she was off Iceland. Seventeen days later Triumph was firing Tomahawk missiles into Afghanistan. You cannot do that with an SSK because it lacks the capability, the underwater endurance and speed."

But does the RN's submarine flotilla not suffer from the same potential problem as its surface warships - too many tasks and not enough vessels?

"I would like to have 20 SSNs rather than 12, but again it is about balancing investment in the resources of today with what you need to create the capability of tomorrow."

It is no secret that the Royal Navy has struggled to have even 12 SSNs available...

"There is no doubt we have had problems with attack submarine availability because of unexpected mechanical issues. But, with a nuclear submarine we never take even the tiniest chance - if there is a problem of any sort a nuclear boat will not put to sea. The Royal Navy has a great record for nuclear safety and we are not going to lose it. The speed with which we have resolved problems has been remarkable but, because of these issues, we have experienced lower availability, particularly in the older Swiftsures. With regard to the latter, once the required checks have been carried out I am sure we will maintain a higher availability."

Of course, you are First Sea Lord at a time when the Royal Navy has sent a war-fighting task group to the waters of the Middle East. You were the Commanding Officer of HMS Ardent, a frigate sunk during the Falklands War of 1982. Did the emotional departure of Ark Royal from Portsmouth in January, on a voyage of uncertainty that could end in war, stir up some memories of similar circumstances?

"Of course. And in 2002, the departure of 45 Commando to Afghanistan, where we thought they might end up in combat, also triggered off some memories of what it feels like to go to war.

I decided that I had to go and see them before they left, as there is no way I will send people somewhere they might potentially face combat without looking them in the eye."

A letter in one of the UK's esteemed national newspapers labelled the decision to send Ark Royal into the Gulf as a decision by men who know nothing about war.

What's your reaction to those sorts of claims?

"I know all about risk. If you are talking about air threats, the loss of my ship in the Falklands is a good example of a situation where we deployed warships ill-equipped for the dangers they would face. However, the Government and the senior Admirals of the day decided it was a risk worth taking. I know very well that taking risks in a war situation can mean dead people."

So, you are not the sort of man who will send today's British warships into a situation they could not handle?

"There is always an element of risk. It is the game we are in. Carriers can operate in the Gulf. Two Invincible Class ships carried out deployments in the northern Gulf in the late 1990s and the US Navy operates much bigger carriers than ours in there.

A latent mine risk exists...Iraq still has residual anti-shipping missile capability and an air force that might try to exert itself over the sea. The threat of suicide boat attack is present beyond the Gulf, never mind in it, as we saw when the USS Cole was attacked in Aden. HMS Campbeltown visited Aden last year because the risk assessment was such that we decided it could happen. It is all about balancing risk with the capabilities you can deploy to reduce it - air-defence destroyers that can shoot down missiles and planes, mine warfare ships, measures to counter suicide boat attack.

In the case of the Gulf in 2003, you also look at what the US Navy will have in terms of layered defence.

The secret to our success in the Gulf War of 1991, where we faced the same range of threats, was our experience in the Falklands, where the RN learned some hard lessons. That still applies today."

What's your opinion of the broader situation facing us today in the Gulf?

"Saddam needs to get rid of his Weapons of Mass Destruction.

We have decided to deploy naval forces in strength to back up the work of the arms inspectors and the diplomatic effort. It is a traditional use of seapower and entirely justified. Those naval forces show we mean business."

But the jet fighter that played such a key part in providing air defence for the task force in the Falklands War, the Sea Harrier, has been left behind...

"Ark Royal has deployed as a helicopter carrier, or LPH, because we could see that we might need to project power in the same way that we used her sister, Illustrious, in 2001, to insert Royal Marines into the Afghan battlefield. The truth is that, with the retirement of HMS Fearless last year, we lacked an amphibious platform and the new assault ships are not yet in service. We clearly needed to form another Amphibious Ready Group in addition to the one centred on HMS Ocean, because two Royal Marine commando groups were to be sent. It was therefore eminently sensible to use Ark Royal in the LPH role. The package deployed as Naval Task Group 2003 in January was assembled around Ark and Ocean, with an appropriate level of escorts. It is a sensible package that gives the UK Government a range of options."

But the force package you put together was larger than the original Naval Task Group 2003 deployment already scheduled...

"You are referring to the addition of HMS Ocean ARG?"

Yes.

"Ocean has just emerged from a refit, so we needed to work her up to full operational status as part of a task group anyway.

It represented a good opportunity. Whether or not the ARG would go through the Suez Canal with NTG 03 was going to be a political decision. Anyone who knows the reality of war, like I do, wishes devoutly to avoid the need to fight, hoping that a political solution can be found...but the will to fight has to be there. The Royal Navy will fight if it has to."

Returning to the issue of the Harriers - is it not possible for the RAF Harrier GR7 strike jets and Navy FA2 fighters of Joint Force Harrier to deploy to a forward airbase, and still provide dedicated support to the British naval task group?

"The RAF's GR7s are being sent, but, as regards the FA2s, there is not a requirement. There will be plenty of fighters out there from the US Navy and elsewhere."

But, the FA2 is reputed to be the UK's best fighter...why leave it behind?

"Until the Eurofighter comes into the service that may well be true, especially with the FA2's formidable combination of Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles and Blue Vixen radar.

In the past FA2s have flown over Iraq, but aside from not being needed, there are issues of obsolescence. For example, the engine is under-powered for hot weather."

What's your opinion of the so-called 'air-defence gap' that will occur with the FA2 being withdrawn in 2006, six years earlier than expected?

"We come back to balancing the investment in present day resources with finding the funds for increased future capabilities.

As you know the RAF and Navy pilots in Joint Force Harrier will move to the GR9, which gives us an enhanced power projection capability but is not a dedicated air-defence fighter. In a perfect world I would love to have the resources to do the modifications that will get the FA2 to 2012. But, we will hopefully have the Type 45 from 2007 and there will be some capability in the GR9, which will help close the air-defence gap. They will be palliatives for the risk factor. You need a lot of Type 45s to give the same coverage as a naval air-defence fighter. However, I am sure it is the right decision despite the risk."

But what will happen if there is another Falklands-style situation, where the Royal Navy finds itself having to fight a war far from the nearest land-based UK fighters, and without the US Navy to fill in the gaps?

"If we had to do an operation without the US Navy in that risk period, and without shore-based air cover from the RAF, I may have to tell the Government of the day that the RN cannot do it."

Where does the Royal Navy rank today?

"It is the second most powerful navy in the world after the US fleet. We have 130 ships, 300 aircraft and seven-and-a-half thousand marines, including a commando brigade. The capability fielded by the RN is incredible, bearing in mind it has a total personnel strength of only 40,000."

How does the RN manage to get a lot out of a little?

"I think we maximise what we have and are not afraid to be adaptable and think of radical solutions. Look at the Invincible Class carriers. They were originally conceived as 'through-deck cruisers', carrying nine helicopters for ASW against the Soviets.

We then tacked on an equivalent number of Sea Harriers. Today the same ships can carry 20 VSTOL jets, with helicopters deployed in accompanying RFA support ships.

The mix in the carriers varies depending on the role. During the 1997 Ocean Wave deployment to Asia, which I commanded, the deployed carrier had 12 fast jets and ten helicopters embarked. Even with 18 jets embarked a couple of helicopters can still be carried. And, of course, as touched on earlier, the Invincibles have a secondary role as helicopter carriers for amphibious operations."

What about today's British sailors - how good are they?

"Our people are very good and very well trained."

How long before we see a woman as the CO of a major warship?

"Women first went to sea as a permanent part of warship crews in 1990, with a frigate carrying female sailors subsequently deployed as part of the RN task group in the 1991 Gulf War.

It takes time for someone to make his or her way up the chain.

We have already seen a female Executive Officer of a major warship, so within the next few years we will have our first CO.

I had my first big ship in 1982, the Ardent, which I took to the Falklands as a Commander and I did not become an admiral until 1994.

There will be a woman admiral at some stage, of that I have no doubt. We have some really capable women serving in the RN and they add a great deal to the Service."

Given all you have said about the excellence of the RN and its people is true, why do the British public barely seem aware of how good their Navy is?

"A century ago the Royal Navy was, without a doubt, the most powerful navy in the world, with a pre-eminent position in British life, but things change..."

Perhaps it's a case of 'how are the mighty fallen'?

"The Royal Navy is still an amazing organisation, with highly capable equipment and fantastic people. It still has an important job to do and is among the best in the world. We live in an era dominated by maritime strategy - today's events are ample evidence of that - so the RN is as relevant to the UK's security as it has ever been. It is often overlooked that the UK's maritime sector creates more revenue than any other, and that includes farming and aerospace. The sea is still very important and therefore so is having a strong Navy."

Where would you like to leave the Royal Navy when your term of office as First Sea Lord ends?

"I intend leaving the Royal Navy with a firm order for the two CVFs, with the ships and other equipment already ordered coming into service and with increased capability in all the fleet's platforms. I would also like to see recruiting at a good rate, because people are our most important asset. Achieving those objectives will not be easy and the Royal Navy has to make sure it is prepared to try innovation to succeed, whether that is how ships are deployed, or the management of personnel."