Reverse the cuts in troops, warns former military commander
THE Afghanistan crisis has shown that technology cannot replace “boots on the ground”, a former military commander has said as he warned Britain’s reputation will be tarnished by further cuts to troop numbers.
Lt Gen Sir James Bucknall, who was deputy commander of coalition forces in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2011, urged the Government to reverse its plan to shrink the Army by thousands of soldiers.
In a letter to The Daily Telegraph, the retired commander said the recent Defence Review, which will see troop numbers cut to the smallest in history, had been undermined by recent events.
He wrote: “If the past few days in Afghanistan have shown anything, it is that numbers count. Strategic patience is all – you must have the critical mass to sustain an operation. The Defence Review removes that capability.
“Technology can and must facilitate our soldiers, but it cannot replace boots on the ground. After all, it was not technology that enabled the Taliban to roll up Afghanistan in a matter of weeks, a feat that came as a strategic surprise to the West.”
Around 900 British troops have been deployed to Kabul to rescue the remaining 3,000 British passport holders in the country and a further 3,000 Afghan nationals under the Government’s relocation scheme.
The letter follows Ben Wallace, the Defence Secretary, announcing in March that the number of fully trained troops who can be deployed on operations will be cut to 72,500.
Sir James wrote: “The context in which the Defence Review was conceived has changed. Afghanistan is a disaster of strategic proportions with implications for our foreign policy, defence policy, for Nato and for our relationship with the US. If Britain wishes to retain any credibility and relevance with allies and adversaries alike, its response cannot be to cut 9,500 soldiers from the Army. The Government must revisit the Defence Review; these cuts have to be reversed.”
The Ministry of Defence has insisted the total number of recruits in training will not be included in the reduction, meaning that the size of the actual cut would be 3,500, not 9,500.
sir – What price now the Government’s Defence Review, which cuts 9,500 soldiers from the Army on the brittle promise that “technological advantage will mean that greater effect can be delivered by fewer people”?
If the last few days in Afghanistan have shown anything, it is that numbers count. Strategic patience is all – you must have the critical mass to sustain an operation. The Defence Review removes that capability.
Technology can and must facilitate our soldiers, but it cannot replace boots on the ground. After all, it was not technology that enabled the Taliban to roll up Afghanistan in a matter of weeks, a feat that came as a strategic surprise to the West.
The context in which the Defence Review was conceived has changed. Afghanistan is a disaster of strategic proportions with implications for our foreign policy, defence policy, for Nato and for our relationship with the US.
If Britain wishes to retain any credibility and relevance with allies and adversaries alike, its response cannot be to cut 9,500 soldiers from the Army. The Government must revisit the Defence Review; these cuts have to be reversed.
Lt Gen Sir James Bucknall
Deputy Commander of Coalition Forces, Afghanistan (2010-11) Blandford Forum, Dorset
sir – Referring to the deteriorating situation in Afghanistan, France’s foreign minister, Jean-yves Le Drian, says that “France does not forget those who have worked for her”.
This is demonstrably untrue. In Indochina in 1954, France signed the ceasefire and abandoned the French and indigenous men of the GCMA, anti-guerrilla squads operating deep in enemy territory. They were hunted down and killed by the North Vietnamese over the following three years. In Algeria in 1962, the French abandoned the Harkis, several thousand men who had fought as auxiliaries against the rebels. They, too, were hunted down and killed.
The foreign minister should make sure of his history before making such vainglorious pronouncements.
David Miller
Newton Abbot, Devon