British defence policy is alarmingly muddled

Sir – The Integrated Review of 2021 concluded that a reduction in troop numbers was justified because future conflicts were more likely to be “cyber” wars, not requiring military personnel or equipment.

Now you report (January 24) that General Sir Patrick Sanders, the head of the Army, has said the British public will be mobilised to fight if we go to war because the Army is too small.

I expect those visionaries at the Ministry of Defence are still in post.

NP Scott

Reigate, Surrey

Sir – There has never been a better time to invest heavily in the Reserve Forces. Not only would a body of trained personnel be developed, but such activity would benefit the younger elements of society.

Nik Perfitt

Perth, Western Australia

Sir – Given that Russia cannot even achieve its objectives in Ukraine, General Sir Patrick Sanders and Admiral Rob Bauer significantly overstate the threat of major war in Europe (report, January 24).

Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, chief of the defence staff, was correct in stating: “It is absurd to entertain the notion that Russia is in any way a match for Nato.” Its 31 members, soon to be 32, have a much larger industrial base and a combined wealth that is 20 times greater than Russia’s. Nato has a huge range of military capabilities, many of which Russia lacks, and three million men and women under arms, with more in reserve.

There is no doubt that Britain needs to spend more on defence – but this should focus on war-winning technology and the ability to deploy maritime and air-delivered combat power rapidly, as the conflict in the Red Sea has demonstrated.

Rear Admiral Philip Mathias (retd)

Southsea, Hampshire

Sir – If General Sir Patrick Sanders is correct that, in the event of conflict with Russia, the Government must “mobilise the nation”, will those mobilised be able to work from home?

Joseph Kennils

Little Wigborough, Essex