This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/jul/05/cameron-defence-security-cheap-britain
The article has changed 6 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 1 | Version 2 |
|---|---|
| Cameron is doing defence and security on the cheap. Will he get away with it? | Cameron is doing defence and security on the cheap. Will he get away with it? |
| (30 days later) | |
| The cynical and deliberate political manoeuvring that has preceded Thursday's announcement has had a real impact on the morale of our soldiers and their families. The long-term danger for Britain is the effect that a reduction of 20,000 troops, based on savings rather than strategy, will have on the security of our nation and our future ability to leverage influence in the world. | The cynical and deliberate political manoeuvring that has preceded Thursday's announcement has had a real impact on the morale of our soldiers and their families. The long-term danger for Britain is the effect that a reduction of 20,000 troops, based on savings rather than strategy, will have on the security of our nation and our future ability to leverage influence in the world. |
| While certain elements of combat will endure, the evolutionary nature and character of modern warfare means it is right that our armed forces change in a changing world. But this change must be underpinned by rigorous analysis of future threats and our intent to act on the world stage. The government is reducing capacity and capability when it cannot be said that the next decade will be safer than the last. | While certain elements of combat will endure, the evolutionary nature and character of modern warfare means it is right that our armed forces change in a changing world. But this change must be underpinned by rigorous analysis of future threats and our intent to act on the world stage. The government is reducing capacity and capability when it cannot be said that the next decade will be safer than the last. |
| Modernisation is, of course, necessary, and while we must be mindful of resource it should also be respectful of our history – a history that tells us that the only certainty is uncertainty. Our armed forces have been, and should be, our insurance policy – today this government has downgraded our national policy from "fully comp" to "third-party fire and theft". | Modernisation is, of course, necessary, and while we must be mindful of resource it should also be respectful of our history – a history that tells us that the only certainty is uncertainty. Our armed forces have been, and should be, our insurance policy – today this government has downgraded our national policy from "fully comp" to "third-party fire and theft". |
| Its plan for a sustainable and flexible force relies upon a large expansion of the reservists. This carries significant risk. It is reasonable to expect reserve forces to provide support to the frontline. There are 700 in Afghanistan and it is right that on occasions such as the Olympic Games, or in times of national emergency such as flood relief, they provide support, ideally based on their professional skill set. | Its plan for a sustainable and flexible force relies upon a large expansion of the reservists. This carries significant risk. It is reasonable to expect reserve forces to provide support to the frontline. There are 700 in Afghanistan and it is right that on occasions such as the Olympic Games, or in times of national emergency such as flood relief, they provide support, ideally based on their professional skill set. |
| Generally, reservists have been used as backfill to complement the regular forces, not replace them. The defence secretary, Philip Hammond, proposes they form their own units, which will be deployed as a company or platoon in future conflicts, marking a major cultural shift in the way we operate in the field. | Generally, reservists have been used as backfill to complement the regular forces, not replace them. The defence secretary, Philip Hammond, proposes they form their own units, which will be deployed as a company or platoon in future conflicts, marking a major cultural shift in the way we operate in the field. |
| Does any sensible, independent military thinker believe this decision is based upon strategy? No, the only strategy is to pay down the deficit at all costs. This is not a response to threats but self-made capability shortfalls. Let us be clear, as a country we are sleepwalking into a period of strategic shrinkage, with David Cameron and Hammond seeking to do defence and security on the cheap. They might get away with it. They might not. | Does any sensible, independent military thinker believe this decision is based upon strategy? No, the only strategy is to pay down the deficit at all costs. This is not a response to threats but self-made capability shortfalls. Let us be clear, as a country we are sleepwalking into a period of strategic shrinkage, with David Cameron and Hammond seeking to do defence and security on the cheap. They might get away with it. They might not. |
| Another cultural shift is Hammond's recent coded reference to defence logistics. Undoubtedly there exists the desire to make more of the market: for private security companies and defence contractors to fill the capability gaps created by the reduction in logistical and key enabling support. Again, controversial, risky and with no real guarantee it will either improve performance or reduce costs. | Another cultural shift is Hammond's recent coded reference to defence logistics. Undoubtedly there exists the desire to make more of the market: for private security companies and defence contractors to fill the capability gaps created by the reduction in logistical and key enabling support. Again, controversial, risky and with no real guarantee it will either improve performance or reduce costs. |
| We also should not overlook the historical implications of today's announcement. The loss of titles such as 3rd Battalion, the Yorkshire Regiment, with a history dating back to the days of Napoleon, when it was formerly known as the Duke of Wellington's Regiment, will be painful. | We also should not overlook the historical implications of today's announcement. The loss of titles such as 3rd Battalion, the Yorkshire Regiment, with a history dating back to the days of Napoleon, when it was formerly known as the Duke of Wellington's Regiment, will be painful. |
| What has been lost in the debate around the removal of battalions such as 3 Yorks is that this identity matters to people. Today and tonight, our soldiers in Afghanistan will be facing lethal threat. They will no doubt be scared and they will be battling their own personal demons. Frankly, they are not doing it for a greater Afghanistan. They're not doing it for the prime minister or even for the Queen and a safer United Kingdom. They are doing it for the soldiers in front of them and the soldiers behind them. They are doing it for their mates in the regiment because it matters to them. | What has been lost in the debate around the removal of battalions such as 3 Yorks is that this identity matters to people. Today and tonight, our soldiers in Afghanistan will be facing lethal threat. They will no doubt be scared and they will be battling their own personal demons. Frankly, they are not doing it for a greater Afghanistan. They're not doing it for the prime minister or even for the Queen and a safer United Kingdom. They are doing it for the soldiers in front of them and the soldiers behind them. They are doing it for their mates in the regiment because it matters to them. |
| The government's credibility to manage and shape future military capability has been stretched to the limit after the flawed strategic defence and security review of October 2010. | The government's credibility to manage and shape future military capability has been stretched to the limit after the flawed strategic defence and security review of October 2010. |
| If the government had been clear in its vision from the outset, and embraced a debate about global influence and reach versus a reduction in military capability, then we would be closer to a more strategic arrangement for the army. Instead, there has been a fundamental failure on the part of the government to analyse what we need and what we can convincingly aspire to do. | If the government had been clear in its vision from the outset, and embraced a debate about global influence and reach versus a reduction in military capability, then we would be closer to a more strategic arrangement for the army. Instead, there has been a fundamental failure on the part of the government to analyse what we need and what we can convincingly aspire to do. |
| Dan Jarvis is Labour MP for Barnsley Central and a former officer in the Parachute Regiment | Dan Jarvis is Labour MP for Barnsley Central and a former officer in the Parachute Regiment |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. | |
| Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning. Enter your email address to subscribe. |