Rethinking UK Defense Priorities

A UK think-tank is urging a more realistic assessment of priorities for the Soldiers of the Queen.

The think tank's report is basically a plea that Britain should stop punching "above its weight" and start punching at its proper, much lighter, weight.
The report should be seen as part of a sequence since World War Two in which Britain has had to adjust its defence policy to fit its diminishing place in the world, often against resistance from entrenched political, military and industrial interests.
The IPPR predicts that the US will soon no longer be the "single superpower" but will remain the one with the "greatest overall impact".
As for the Europeans, it says: "The individual countries of Europe, including the United Kingdom, are... continuing a long and gradual process of decline."

The specific recommendations, as summarized by the BBC, are:

- Greater specialisation in the UK armed forces, investing in high quality personnel training, tactical ground-air support, and intelligence, surveillance, targeting and reconnaissance assets. However, it does recommend an increase in the size of the British forces from 98,000 to 115-120,000.
- More special forces to deal with a Mumbai-type attack in the UK.
- Scaling back some conventional capability led by cutbacks in planned areas of defence spending costing GBP24bn - aircraft carriers, joint strike fighter, Type 45 destroyers and Astute class submarines 'should all be in the frame'.
- Review of Trident replacement to see if there are alternatives or if the system's life can be extended.
It also proposes:
- A National Security Council for the UK, to co-ordinate security policy currently divided up among government departments.
- An active British role in developing European defence co-operation, though not, it adds, a European army and not as a way to replace Nato. 'UK reliance on the United States is complacent and it is delusional to believe the UK can go it alone. We need a major increase in European defence and security co-operation to strengthen Nato.'

By: Brant