A £3 billion cash injection into the armed forces announced by Rachel Reeves in today’s budget will do little to address the problems the military faces.
There had been fears in the lead up that the military might bear the brunt of a difficult budget and defence bosses will be largely relieved that they came out of it relatively unscathed.
But there will be frustration amongst senior figures in the Ministry of Defence (MOD) that they are essentially being tasked with preparing Britain for the threats of tomorrow (and today) with one arm tied behind their back.
The geo-political picture is clear, and it is not hyperbolic to say that we are already engaged in World War 3.
Our allies across the world are fighting the axis of evil, as Ukraine holds off the Russians while Israel directly and through proxies engages Iran.
Elsewhere, we are soon to see western supplied weapons used against North Koreans in Donetsk whilst China are staging provocative patrols around Taiwan in response to the sale of weapons by the US.
The world finds itself in its most volatile period since the end of the Second World War and is our military equipped to fight it? Absolutely not.
As he stepped down from his post earlier this year, Chief of the General Staff, Sir Patrick Sanders warned that the Army’s ability to warfight left him with sleepless nights and having worked specifically in addressing shortfalls in Army capability in the years following the Ukraine invasion, I can relate to the same sense of dread.
The armed forces spent the first 20 years of this century preparing for operations against insurgents and non-state actors which both consciously and subconsciously meant it failed to maintain its ability to fight wars against peer adversaries.
Just months before the invasion of Ukraine, then prime minister Boris Johnson told a Select Committee “the days of big tank battles in Europe” were over, as an Integrated Review assessed how the UK armed forces could become more agile and technically capable – i.e. smaller.
This approach left the armed forces without an ability to fight on mass that it is now scrambling to address and fund.
Weeklong deployments to evacuate British citizens from civil war-ravaged countries are doable. A medical squadron deploying at short notice following an earthquake is easy. But assembling, let alone deploying a division to fight against a peer enemy? We just cannot do it.
Troop numbers alone highlight the scale of the problem, with the army set to have fewer than 70,000 soldiers by next year. Similarly, fewer than half of the Royal Navy’s escort vessels are currently deployed or immediately deployable.
So, what could we have hoped to see?
Firstly, I doubt that no other government department walked away from the budget jumping for joy, but the consequences of getting defence preparation right in the next few years outweigh any others.
Reeves once more refused to set a date of when the government would increase spending to 2.5% of GDP. This figure is likely to be the minimum amount required to invest in the areas needed to make the armed forces both a credible deterrent and formidable fighting force.
A military capable of meeting the challenges arising across the world is a long way off and it will take an extra zero on the end of the Chancellor’s cheque for the MOD to stand a chance.
Large scale capital projects require billions of pounds worth of investment to replenish stock sent to Ukraine, purchase armoured vehicles and invest in defence industries that allow us to surge production in the event of war.
Investing in capital projects is great but it must also be matched by resource funding to ensure that once an armoured vehicle is purchased, it is maintained, repaired, troops are trained to operate on it and the logistical framework is in place to deploy it to where it is able to have an effect.
All of this requires five times the amount given by the Chancellor. Until the government open their eyes to the real, existential threat posed by our adversaries, military leaders will be unable to plan to counter foreign aggression.
