Much fluttering in the doo’cots in military and political circles as Britain’s Minister for Veterans and “People” (how very right-on) Al Carns said in a recent speech at the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) in London that the British Army would be “worn down in six months to a year” in any future major war.
Carns’ statement carries some weight in discussion in defence circles as he is himself an ex-serviceman (or “veteran” if you speak Americano). He was a regular Royal Marines officer, which is no mean feat, and now a reservist in the same branch.
So he has some gravitas on the topic, which I am more than happy to acknowledge. Not everyone can hack the Royal Marines’ training, and he has some kudos in the bank so to speak.
That said, and having doffed my hat to his military service, I think his viewpoint here is hopelessly, if not hysterically, optimistic.
Far from the British army lasting between six and twelve months in the sort of combat we have seen in Ukraine, I’d be hugely impressed if they lasted as much as six weeks. Not that there’s anything wrong with our boys and girls in uniform, because there isn’t, but because our current political cohort doesn’t have a Scooby Doo when it comes to defence matters.
And, arguably, that’s not their fault. The blame lies fair and square at the door of successive defence chiefs who have been unable, or unwilling, to tell it like it is. I could name names, and would do if the financial incentives were attractive, but they know who they are. Hopefully none of them will make the House of Lords.
Al Carns’ laughable declaration at the RUSI conference is but the latest in a litany of nonsense outbursts from people who should know better.
Take the howlingly ridiculous statement from Deputy Chief of Defence Staff (DCDS) Lieutenant General Rob Macgowan, another Royal Marines officer, that if Russian attacked in eastern Europe the British Army would be ready to meet them in battle that evening.
What are these people smoking? The British Army would be hard pressed to put a brigade, let alone a division, in the field in short order.
We don’t have the people or the kit to do so.
We need to remind ourselves that at the very end of the Cold War, in 1990, the British Army managed – just – to deploy a two-armoured brigade division to Saudi Arabia as part of the coalition to take on Saddam Hussein and his Iraqi army.
To do this, at a time when our army’s strength was over 300,000 with 1,200 main battle tanks, we had to strip regiments of much of their equipment and materiel to reinforce the expeditionary effort. My own tank regiment was rendered ineffective, with all its 57 tanks losing their gun barrels which were sent to the Middle East, together with all the engines from our recce vehicles.
Today we are looking at having to do the same sort of thing but with greatly reduced numbers – 75,000 personnel and just over 200 tanks. No wonder some of our American allies think that the UK can no longer claim to be a “Tier 1” military power.
That’s the reality of where the UK is militarily at the moment. Our armed forces are pitifully few in number, there is a shortage of personnel across all three services, and much of their current equipment is long-in-the-tooth and obsolescent, and in some cases obsolete.
To a certain extent the services themselves are to blame, because a “can do” attitude is inculcated within their ethos and culture. Ask the RN, Army, and/or RAF to carry out any task and they’ll say they can do it, notwithstanding they way be woefully resourced to do so. And from this stems the sort of gung-ho statements we have heard from senior officers in recent days.
So here is my plea to the Chief of Defence Staff Admiral Sir Tony Radikin and the three service chiefs; the next time you meet with John Healey and his Ministers please tell them how it really is, not what you think they might want to hear.
Is that too much to ask?
Lt Col Stuart Crawford is a political and defence commentator and former Army officer. Sign up for his podcasts and newsletters at www.DefenceReview.uk
