As we come closer to May 7th, we see the parties attempt to bribe the electorate with more and more incentives to get into power. Welcome to the inward-looking politics of selfishness and self-centredness which plagues western civilization and will lead to potential global ruin.
It appears that none of the main parties can guarantee any real game-changing levels of investment in defence. The Royal Navy barely has enough ships, and the futures of the two new aircraft is far from certain, in addition to this, the RAF and British Army have also seen huge reductions in numbers and may face further cuts.
So, what are the dangers facing this country? Some argue that warfare has changed and that we no longer need expansive conventional forces that were required in the cold war. Some even argue that we do not require nuclear weapons, even though this has been responsible for an unheralded era of peace when faced otherwise by unprecedented wars between east and west. Sceptics in defence spending argue that the world has changed, and that we face unconventional threats, which we do and always have faced, from the IRA in the 70’s, to Islamic terrorism, which has defined the modern era. However, we do still face major threats, such as those from Argentina and Russia.
I sometimes ask myself, what would happen if the Argentines retook the Falklands? Could we send the glorious armada from the first war and retake the islands with the courage and determination like before? No, we lack the forces, we have no aircraft carriers in service at this moment and we lack the political courage of a Margaret Thatcher to lead us. And do not be fooled, this threat is still very real – Argentina harbours a desire to retake the islands, the country has even recently appointed a ‘Malvinas Secretary’.
And last but far from least, we have the threat from Russia, a country which buzzes our skies with bear bombers and whose warships patrol our waters. Russia continues to be assertive and invest in defence. Vladimir Putin demands Russia be taken seriously and dreams to resurrect the power enjoyed during the soviet era. Russia has already showed its intentions in Ukraine, and now what next? If Russia invades a Baltic nation, how can the UK respond? The UK can barely defend its own territory against Russia, let alone defend allies. In January 2015, Russia sent a warship 30 miles from the Scottish coast, and it took 24 hours for us to send a warship to make a 600-mile journey from Portsmouth.
This situation has arisen because of the perceived notion that the British public do not rank defence highly and the parties are too concerned with winning votes instead of promising any real investment in defence, which is not seen as a vote winner. However, it is not just the UK, it is the entire west which suffers from this problem. The US continues to cut defence and 4 out of 28 NATO countries are spending at east 2% of GDP on defence. In fact, defence spending by NATO countries is projected to be outmatched by non-NATO countries in seven years.
We are sending the wrong signals to our foes and leaders such as Putin, who could potentially see this as appeasement. And what is my answer to those who argue that we do not need conventional forces and that warfare has changed? My argument would be to look at Syria and Iraq and see how Islamic terrorism has evolved.
