Putin is learning from his mistakes. We are not
Slashing the size of the British Army will leave us incapable of fulfilling our commitments to Nato
The credit Boris Johnson rightly deserves for his deft leadership during the Ukraine crisis risks being eroded by the unnecessary spat between his ministers over Britain’s future defence needs.
The brewing Cabinet row over defence spending is, to my mind, unnecessary because the principal challenge facing our Armed Forces is not about money, even though it is important that the Government provides proper funding. It is whether they have the right equipment and manpower strength to make them a credible war-fighting force capable of fighting and defeating a determined foe such as Russia.
There is a disturbing complacency taking root in some British security circles that, because the Russian military has taken such a battering during the early exchanges of the Ukraine conflict, the threat the Kremlin poses to Western security has been overstated. Therefore, it is claimed, there is no need to revise our current plan to reduce Britain’s fighting strength.
Some even argue that Russia’s hapless military performance in Ukraine supports the argument that, in the wars of the future, conventional firepower such as tanks, artillery and other heavy armour will be rendered redundant by the emergence of new innovations such as drones and cyber technology.
This is military illiteracy of a very high order, usually spouted by retired junior officers who have had no experience of front-line combat. If tanks and artillery were really so obsolete, why are the Ukrainians in such desperate need of them to achieve their war aims?
If Britain and its allies are to make themselves combat-ready to defend Europe, then they need to make a realistic appraisal of the true extent of the Russian threat, not indulge themselves with fanciful notions that conventional warfare is for the history books.
As General Sir Patrick Sanders, the new head of the British Army who commanded forces in both Iraq and Afghanistan, commented pithily in his first major speech since taking charge, it is not possible to “cyber your way across a river”.
Sir Patrick also made the powerful point that, in terms of our ability to confront Russian aggression, we have reached a “1937 moment”, one where we just about have enough time to get our Armed Forces match-fit to tackle future threats – so long as difficult decisions are taken now, and not booted into the long grass.
Russian forces may have been decimated during the opening salvoes in the Ukraine conflict, but senior UK military intelligence officers predict that they will be fully replenished in two years’ time, when they will constitute an even more deadly threat.
Consequently, Downing Street needs, as a matter of national urgency, to ditch its obsession with cutting the size of the standing Army to its lowest level since the 18th century – a policy Sir Patrick describes as “perverse”.
It is a sobering thought that, when the rest of the Nato alliance is strengthening its resources, an obsession with beggaring Britain’s military might means that, for all Mr Johnson’s pretensions of emulating Winston Churchill as a wartime leader, Britain will be unable to meet even the most basic of its Nato commitments.
To combat the Russian threat, Nato leaders meeting in Madrid this week are to approve a dramatic increase in the number of high-readiness troops stationed in Europe from their current level of 40,000 to 300,000 by 2023. But it is a moot point how much of a contribution Britain will be able to make to this strengthened force when the Army would currently struggle to deploy a single combat brigade, let alone the full-strength fighting division required by our long-standing Nato commitments.
Furthermore, there will be a great deal more of Europe to defend against Mr Putin’s revanchist aims now that Turkey has dropped its objection to Sweden and Finland joining the alliance.
Finland’s membership will extend Nato’s north-western border with Russia by a further 830 miles. The country has already put itself on a war footing for a possible confrontation with Moscow, with more than a fifth of the country’s 5.5million population trained to serve in the military.
Putin is learning from his mistakes. And the realisation that the Russian threat can no longer be ignored has even seen Germany ditch its pacifist outlook in favour of reinvesting in its military strength, with Berlin set to spend more on defence than any of its other European allies.
In these circumstances, there is a real risk that Britain could find itself on the wrong side of history unless Downing Street gets its act together and makes some hard choices about our future military capabilities.
Sure, it is important for the Armed Forces to receive proper funding, but it is not just the size of the defence budget that counts, it is the warfighting strength it produces. The Government’s ultimate priority, therefore, must be to make sure that our military is not only ready to do battle with Russia, but to win.