Decadent Britain is joining Europe in surrender
By ignoring our national defence, the Government is failing in its basic duty at a time of profound danger
If, as is frequently said, Britain is facing another 1930s moment in terms of the existential threat posed by foes like Russia, then Chancellor Jeremy Hunt’s perfunctory mention of defence spending in his Budget statement simply reaffirms the view that the Government remains intent on sleepwalking towards disaster.
In the weeks leading up to yesterday’s statement, the parlous state of our Armed Forces has been laid bare for all to see. The Army is too small and ill-equipped to conduct overseas combat operations at any meaningful level, the Royal Navy has two 65,000-ton aircraft carriers that have neither the manpower nor combat aircraft to make them fully operational, while the Royal Air Force is desperately short of combat aircraft.
This wanton reduction in Britain’s military strength, moreover, is taking place at a time when, as Lord Cameron observed only in January, “the lights are absolutely flashing red on the global dashboard”. The Foreign Secretary pointed out that it was “hard to think of a time when there has been so much danger and insecurity and instability in the world”.
His Lordship no doubt had in mind the mounting threat posed by hostile states like Russia, which has increased defence spending to an estimated 7.5 per cent of GDP following its unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. China, meanwhile, announced this week it is boosting defence spending by 7.2 per cent this year, fuelling a military budget that has more than doubled during President Xi Jinping’s 11 years in office.
By contrast, Hunt’s reference to defence spending accounted for just a few seconds of his hour-long speech. The Chancellor confirmed that defence spending would meet its 2 per cent of GDP target – the minimum Nato requirement – but a Government commitment to raise it to 2.5 per cent will be fulfilled only “as soon as the economic conditions allow”, which is Treasury-speak for “dream on”.
It is not as though ministers are unaware of the urgent need to upgrade our national defences. When Foreign Secretary, Hunt himself called for spending to be raised to 3 per cent, while in the pre-budget Whitehall lobbying contest, Defence Secretary Grant Shapps made a compelling case for the Chancellor to take “bold action” to raise the defence budget to 2.5 per cent. “This will resonate with our allies and adversaries. It would re-establish our leadership in Europe,” he argued.
Instead, Hunt appeared to blithely ignore the case for increased defence expenditure, preferring instead to spend the available funds on more parochial projects, like investing £4.2billion in technology that can be applied to fill in NHS forms.
As Lord Stirrup, who served as chief of the defence staff from 2006 to 2010, memorably remarked during a House of Lords debate this week, the Government’s attitude is “like someone muttering about one day taking out adequate insurance while the house burns down around their ears.”
Not that Labour is any better. In his reply to Hunt’s announcement, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer made no mention of defence, even though Labour has previously called for a post-9/11-style increase in defence spending in response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
With a general election in prospect, politicians will argue that they need to concentrate on core domestic issues, such as the NHS and taxation, to win over voters.
By ignoring such a fundamental issue as our national defence, though, the Government is failing in its basic duty to safeguard the welfare of its citizens when the nation faces jeopardy on a number of fronts.
One of the military’s most basic assumptions, for example, which dates back to the end of the Cold War, is that the British military would never be required to fight in isolation, and that any future military operations would be conducted in conjunction with key allies, especially in Nato.
That assumption needs to be radically revised after the European Union revealed this week that, in the event of a European war with Russia, Brussels would block the export of weapons to Britain to protect its own capitals. If Donald Trump, moreover, succeeds in his quest to be re-elected president, Britain’s long-standing reliance on the US military for protection could no longer be taken for granted.
In such circumstances, Britain must do more to develop its own ability to defend itself, rather than relying on others. Military self-sufficiency is an approach that is already being adopted by a number of European countries, such as Denmark, whose geographical proximity to Russia leaves them with no option but to give their military a radical upgrade.
As Denmark’s centre-left prime minister Mette Frederiksen said in a recent interview, the threat Europe faces from a “more aggressive Russia” means that “naive” Europeans must commit to prolonged defence and security funding increases instead of focusing on welfare spending and tax cuts.
That Left-wing Danish politicians should be calling for extra defence spending underlines the utter folly of the British government’s refusal even to discuss the issue.