Defence

2021-03-31

UKIP's Defence spokesman Lieutenant-General Jonathon Riley writing in Conservative Woman reviews China's geopolitical stance, and he paints a concerning picture.

"There is little point in the West trying to deal with China as if she were another democratic or even old-style communist state"

"... military consequences will be determined by who can employ them. Principally, this is the US and certainly not the hollowed-out British armed forces"

It may be worth mentioning that the only reason that the US is in pole position is that President Trump spent a lot of money on brining the US armed forces up to scratch - it remains to be seen how the new

2021-03-19

Robert David Steele is a prolific ideas man and there seem to be few important subjects that have not caught his attention. Here he takes an external look at where he sees NATO could go by 2040.

I'm not a military man but nor are our parliamentarians, who seem content to simply let the boffins get on with it - but we have seen where that approach has led us in the Covid arena, and the idea that similar thinking could hold sway within NATO strategic planning is frankly horrifying, so I think a different approach is required.

Maybe this is it, maybe we should do something differently, but I do think we would be very foolish not to take an interest.

Download the

2021-03-18

UK Column News of 7th March has a pertinent section on how NATO is developing to effect an amicable merger with EU Military Union - the question being whether this will alter the nature of the arrangements for better or for worse.

The UK of course is "committed to NATO" as the cornerstone of our defence policy, so perhaps we are seeing how the Brexit process is being allowed (or not) to change the direction of our military development.

Boris has now conducted an "integrated" review of our defence needs for the future, and as always UK Column has the story:

Like / Dislike this video here.

2021-02-25

Now that the UK has "left the EU" our defence policy is as opaque as ever, and our defence budget will no doubt now be more stretched than ever given the predations of government policy in response to Covid.

So whither now our armed forces, and in particular, the army?

Adrian Hill writing for Briefings for Britain outlines some draft proposals for maintaining our fighting capability whilst significantly reducing manpower costs but maintaining numbers - a fine trick if it could be pulled off!

He sensibly contrasts the UK approach with the techniques adopted by other countries, and concludes that we have much to learn if only we had the will to do so.

Read all about

2020-12-02

David Banks writing for Brexit Watch reviews the current state of our "withdrawal" from EU defence initiatives, and finds the usual ambiguity (some might think disparity) about our military relationship with the EU post-"Brexit".

Of course, a military relationship doesn't just cover troop and equipment deployments, it must also cover inter-operability, common specifications, procurement and defence contractors.

If we can't manufacture our own arms and equipment then we will be beholden to the EU for such supplies - which could therefore be withheld in the event of policy differences. In any case, what chance do we think UK defence contractors would have of being chosen by the EU to supply their needs? In the short term they might have little option in specific areas but longer-term contracts could be progressively withheld until our defence industries

2020/11/19

David Ellis reporting today on defence matters for UK Column.

He helps us understand terms such as Skynet, Space Operations and Multi Domain Integration. He also brings us up to date with the European Defence Union . . .

Like / Dislike this video here.

I think David is right that if the US is going to join forces with the EU then NATO is dead, long live Defence Union.

On the other hand I can't see the US wanting to play second fiddle in the command structure, so Defence Union will be a different beast. How different?

Well, who will be the next US President?

If Biden scrapes in then

2020/11/18

Brexit Watch publishes a "drains-up" assessment of misunderstandings (and misinformations?) concerning the UK's commitments to EU Defence Union post Brexit.

Are they being hyper-sensitive when there is "nothing to see here"? Or are elements of "our" government machine still manoeuvring to keep our MPs and the public and maybe even our ministers in the dark over the future of our armed forces?

The fact that there would seem to be a continuing news black-out about our post-Brexit military relationship with the EU (a topic which has always been excluded from the "Brexit negotiations") may tell those of us who harbour suspicions all we need to know.

If even some of these assertions are true then surely this amounts to criminal fraud on a grand scale?

...

2020/10/28

Brexit Watch notes a Reuters report that our government has "told the EU that the UK will not participate in EU military missions". 

Fake News? or Welcome News? If the latter then it is likely highly significant and breaks with a long tradition of speaking of independence whilst acting as if dependent in military and foreign policy matters.

But as yet it is only a report . . .    is it based on an authoritative announcement?

As Brexit Watch remarks, there are many implications to this, so we await developments before booking our post Brexit post Covid post Life-on-Earth celebrations .