Britain’s armed forces: it’s time to cut our cloth for more than a royal funeral
The astonishing precision and overall grandeur of Britain’s armed forces on display during the Queen’s funeral was stirring and a joy to behold. They did their country proud. From the 142 young sailors who pulled the gun carriage to the pallbearers of the Grenadier Guards, the massed pipes and drums, the escorts, the buglers, the mounted cavalry and all the rest, they were, quite simply, magnificent.
But – and I hate to say this – do they flatter to deceive? The military knows how to put on a good show, and I have absolutely no doubt that, if required, like all of its members who preceded them, they would give their lives in the nation’s defence. As soldiers, sailors and airmen (and women), their professionalism and courage are beyond reproach.
What, though, of their political masters? Are they beyond reproach? The clear answer is, no. For the last 40 years, ever since the Falklands war – perhaps, even, since Suez – the story of Britain’s military capacity has been one of uninterrupted decline.
At one level, this was inevitable. Britain no longer has an empire and has only friends and allies within Europe. Only the dwindling band of Colonel Blimps would expect the British Army in the twenty-first century to have either the numbers or the equipment to stage a re-run of D-Day, if such a thing can even be imagined. Beyond the North Sea and the Atlantic approaches, the Royal Navy no longer rules the waves, and it would be foolish, as well as vainglorious, to assume that the RAF could play other than a support role in any large-scale operation anywhere in the world.
The least that Britain should expect of its armed forces is that, pound for pound, they remain among the finest in the world, ready to join with America and our other Nato allies, as well as with Australia, New Zealand, Japan and South Korea, in keeping the world proof against the threats of tyrants and maniacs.
Which is why I ask, do our armed forced merely look good on the parade ground or can they still play a leading role in the defence of the West?
The signs in recent years have not been good. The army is vanishingly small. The lament for the Queen, played by a lone piper, that faded away so poignantly at the end of the committal service in Saint George’s Chapel, could have been a metaphor for Britain’s waning military capability.
As things stand, the Army has a full-time strength of some 80,000 (including just under 4,000 Gurkhas), plus 30,000 volunteer reservists and the regular reserve (veterans subject to recall for up to six years after discharge). In 1960, there were 258,000 regulars; by the time of the Falklands war, in 1982, the total had fallen to 155,000. Currently, there are just 77,000 full-timers, reducing to 72,500 by 2025.
A similar cull, or shortfall, affects almost all equipment. The Army’s 227 Challenger II main battle tanks were supposed to be upgraded to Challenger III status. In fact, only 148 will undergo the switch; the other 79 will be “retired”. All 660 or so Warrior armoured fighting vehicles, in production and regularly upgraded since the 1970s, are to be sold off, replaced by a smaller number of more versatile but arguably less effective Boxer mechanised infantry vehicles. Britain sent six long-range rocket launchers, similar to the deadly US HIMARs, to Ukraine. Why only six? Because we need to keep some for ourselves. The story is one of penny-pinching and number-crunching, with little regard for what may actually be needed in the event of war.
The Navy is a disaster waiting to happen. The recent breakdown of the supercarrier Prince of Wales as it left Portsmouth bound for America is just a symptom of all that has gone wrong in the last ten years. The Prince of Wales, like its sister-carrier Queen Elizabeth, is almost defenceless against missile attack. Worse (almost), it has hardly any planes. The Navy has so far received just a tiny handful of the massively expensive (and still unproven) F35b multi-role attack aircraft it was promised. Our carriers can only function (when in working order) with the cooperation of the US Marine Corps, which up to now has proved most of its strike planes.
Meanwhile, the destroyers that were supposed to protect the carriers, while performing a multitude of other tasks, are a national embarrassment. On occasion, all six have been stuck in port undergoing repairs. The type-45s that were billed as the finest ships of their kind in the world are deeply flawed. Their British-designed engines are defective, albeit that much of the problem relates to a US-supplied cooling system. Worse (again), there were supposed to be 12 of them, then nine, finally six. The only surprise is that the order wasn’t ultimately reduced to two.
The type-26 frigate, intended to be the Navy’s workhorse, or “global combat ship,” should have been in service by now. But it isn’t. The admiralty, under relentless pressure from the Treasury, keeps changing its mind over the specifications, even considering cheaper and smaller diesel engines for some of the proposed ships instead of advanced gas turbines. Of the 14 type-26s originally envisaged, only eight will be built – against nine for Australia and 15 for Canada. We will invest in ships only if they turn a profit. In place of the missing ships, five or six (let’s say three) type 31 “frigates” are to be ordered, to function mainly as offshore patrol ships, doubling as fisheries protection vessels.
Only the seven Astute-class nuclear attack submarines, along with the quartet of submarines that carry Britain’s nuclear deterrent, have so far escaped the cuts, the latter largely as a matter of prestige.
The RAF is probably in the best state of the fighting services. The Eurofighter, also known as the Typhoon, remains a formidable interceptor, with 107 aircraft either in service or due to arrive in the next 12 months. The troubled F35 programme is, however, stuttering along. As things stand, just 30 of the revolutionary multi-role combat aircraft have been delivered. How many more will arrive is a question yet to be answered. It could be as few as 18 or as many as 50, depending on who is signing the cheque. Britain needs more and bigger transport aircraft, more maritime patrol aircraft, more refuelling tankers, more helicopters of all types. But will it get them or will it have to make do for longer with what it’s got?
Liz Truss says that the UK will in future spend not two per cent of GDP on defence, but as much as three per cent. In that event, Britain, over time, would become easily the leading military power in Europe, a reputation it currently clings to by its fingertips, owing largely to the known deficiencies of Germany, Italy and Spain. But it needs to get a move on. America’s generals and admirals are scathing in their judgment of Britain’s current military capacity. We did not cover ourselves in glory in either Iraq or Afghanistan, due largely to lack of manpower and advanced equipment. The shortfalls that exist today will continue for at least the next five years even if the three percent target is achieved.
The minimum shopping list will not come cheap. An increase in the size of the Army to 100,000 regulars is essential, as is a fat order book for more advanced battle tanks, support vehicles and missile launchers. The navy needs additional, and improved, destroyers and more frigates, plus plausible missile defence systems for its carriers. The RAF, though at the cutting edge, is crying out for more of everything. Finally, the Royal Marines need to move up from 7,500 regulars to more like 10,000, operating not just from the two ageing landing docks now in service (only one of which is ready to sail at any one time) but from a large, purpose-built assault ship.
Or … Britain could invest another £10 million or so in all-new dress uniforms for the Brigade of Guards and the Household cavalry so that, along with the latest batch of naval ratings, the armed forces are fully prepared for the next royal funeral rather than the next war.
Write to us with your comments to be considered for publication at letters@reaction.life