‘Stitch-up' or scandal? What triggered the downfall of Britain's Sea Lord
This year, however, the august gathering – due to start on May 12 – was postponed at the last minute because of a keynote speaker dropping out. No, not a Ukrainian admiral sidetracked by urgent business in the Black Sea, or a tetchy Trump envoy throwing a hissy fit. Instead, it was the host himself, First Sea Lord Adml Sir Ben Key – whom, delegates were informed last week, had 'had to step back from all his duties for private reasons'.
The Ministry of Defence declined at first to elaborate, prompting speculation that Sir Ben was perhaps gravely ill. But on Friday, it confirmed he had stepped down while claims of an extramarital affair with a female subordinate are investigated.
It is the first time in the Navy's 500-year history that its First Sea Lord has faced a formal misconduct probe – which is perhaps surprising, given the reputation Royal Navy commanders had, in centuries past, for floggings, drunkenness and occasional acts of piracy.
Yet while it has been portrayed as a straightforward HR matter – the Navy forbids commanders having relationships with underlings – some suspect the reasons for his departure may have been rather murkier. A popular officer among the ranks, Sir Ben was said to be unhappy over planned cuts to the Navy, and was rumoured to have clashed with the Chief of the Defence Staff, Adml Sir Tony Radakin, over priorities. With Labour tipped to publish its long-awaited strategic defence review (SDR) in coming weeks – one that few expect to offer much new cash – there is speculation that the disciplinary proceedings might have been brought about, at least partly, to silence him.
'I think he has been stitched up to get him out of the picture,' one unnamed Naval source told the Mail on Sunday. 'He had constantly raised questions about the delays with new ships, funding for recruiting and the lack of frigates, and he was told to keep quiet. Now he can't say a thing.'
The MoD has declined to comment further, as has Sir Ben, 59, who has two sons and a daughter with his wife, Elly. But whether well-informed or not, the unproven speculation could barely have come at a worse time for the Government, as it tries to persuade both Britain and the world that the Navy will remain a serious global player.
Prime Minister Keir Starmer has promised to increase defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP, amid growing threats from Russia and China, but many experts believe that figure should be twice that. With Donald Trump refusing to act as a Nato backstop, British Navy chiefs feel their own role in Europe's security architecture is now even more important. Their thinking is that Continental powers, particularly Poland and Germany, should focus on land forces, while Britain, as a longstanding naval force, counters Russian threats in the waters off north-west Europe.
The possible future combat scenarios were laid bare in the topics for this year's Sea Lord's essay competition, which included: 'What if China, Russia, Iran or North Korea cut data cables to the UK?' and 'What if the UK has to defend the North Atlantic alone?' Yet, after decades of peace-time cuts, some commanders doubt the Navy even has the capacity to defend Britain's own waters, let alone project power across the Baltics or protect Taiwan.
Last November, Defence Secretary John Healey said he would scrap two amphibious assault ships and a frigate as part of £500 million in short-term savings, while there is also talk of mothballing aircraft carriers amid fears they are too vulnerable to underwater drones.
The downsizing of the Navy is something that Sir Ben has witnessed first hand, having joined the force as a cadet in 1984, at the height of the Cold War. He went on to command a mine hunter, two frigates and the aircraft carrier HMS Illustrious. In 2019, he became the UK's Commander of Joint Operations, supervising British evacuation efforts from Afghanistan after the Taliban took power in 2021, before taking over as First Sea Lord from Sir Tony later that year. Until recently, he was considered a frontrunner to succeed Sir Tony as Chief of the Defence Staff, the Armed Forces' top job.
Officers who have served with Sir Ben speak well of him, although there is by no means consensus over whether he was the victim of a 'stitch-up'. They point out that the Navy, as with the rest of the Armed Forces, has a zero-tolerance stance on officers having affairs with subordinates, given the close-knit working environment on ships and submarines. For low-ranking officers, an illicit liaison could lead to allegations of favouritism. For top-ranking commanders, there could be a risk of blackmail. They also point out that Sir Ben himself had been vocal on sexual propriety.
Last October, he publicly apologised for 'intolerable' misogyny in the Submarine Service, after investigations exposed sexual harassment within its ranks. He returned to the theme in March, telling a Parliamentary defence committee that 'unwelcome sexual behaviours' were being stamped out.
'I don't think there is any stitch-up here – he had a sexual liaison with a subordinate in his chain of command, having dismissed others who did the same,' one former rear admiral says. 'First Sea Lords have more important things to do with their lives than have clandestine affairs.'
Others, though, are sad to see the back of a popular commander-in-chief, and do not rule out the possibility that the affair allegations have been used as an excuse to sideline him.
'There is literally nothing left to cut in the Navy without taking an axe to the body itself, and he may have been resistant to that,' says one source. 'It might have been that a colleague dobbed him in to bring about his downfall.'
In fact, uncertainty had been surrounding Sir Ben's future since well before last week. In January, The Times reported that he intended to retire this summer rather than apply to succeed Sir Tony, citing sources who said he no longer believed he could 'fix the Navy'. His office then contradicted this, briefing journalists that he was committed to managing whatever changes lay ahead.
There is, however, potential for disagreement over how those changes are implemented, particularly when tight budgets force a focus on certain priorities at the expense of others. Among the big expenditure programmes are the new Dreadnought submarines, which will replace the ageing Vanguard fleet as carriers of Britain's Trident nuclear deterrent, and Type 83 destroyers, which will have enhanced air defence capabilities, including against hypersonic missiles. But Sir Tony and Sir Ben may have differed over how much to invest in 'next generation' weapons, especially unmanned air and sea drones.
'Radakin had quite a radical agenda for rapid modernisation, pushing AI and unmanned systems, but you still need ocean-going ships, as drones can't just fly for thousands of miles, especially in extreme weather,' says one source. 'There is a balancing act between retaining the older systems and bringing in new tech – plus ships can take 10 years to build, so you have to plan ahead.'
'Sadly, successive governments have failed to invest properly in defence, and believed naively that the US was going to protect everyone for ever, ' adds ex-Royal Naval commander Ryan Ramsey, a former captain of the submarine HMS Turbulent. 'Radakin and Key are both good guys – maybe there is some politics at play here, but frankly, even if that turns out not to be true, the damage has already been done.'
The mood in the top ranks is unlikely to be improved by reports that the soon-to-be-published SDR contains no specific costings, potentially delaying key spending decisions in the autumn. Critics say Starmer's Government is needlessly prolonging the process, mindful that hiking defence spending is unpopular with Labour's Left.
'Ben Key probably wanted to retire because he was just tired,' added another former comrade. 'Running the Navy is OK when there's money around, but when you're firefighting against cuts all the time, it's just exhausting.'
Meanwhile, the search is now on for a replacement for Sir Ben, who may end up finishing an otherwise distinguished career in disgrace if this is indeed the end of his association with the Navy, as appears to be the case.
The current Second Sea Lord, Vice-Admiral Sir Martin Connell, has taken his place as Acting First Sea Lord, although there is as yet no new date for the Sea Power Conference at Lancaster House. It remains to be seen whether the essay contest will be revised to include the topic: 'What does a Navy do if it loses its top commander overnight?'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


San Francisco Chronicle
25 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
Will UCLA wilt like an Ivy? Trump extortion threat is the ultimate test
California's public universities have the chance to do something elite Ivy League schools didn't have the guts to: stand up to Donald Trump's latest extortion plot. Trump is demanding $1 billion in California taxpayer dollars to avoid a lawsuit over the administration's finding that the campus broke the law in its handling of antisemitism claims last year. Presumably the payout would mean the administration would also agree to restore hundreds of millions of dollars in federal funding it recently yanked. (Californians already pay $83 billion more in taxes than we receive in federal benefits as a state.) Plus, according to terms of the proposed settlement as CNN reported Friday, Trump wants to prohibit overnight demonstrations, require UCLA to discontinue race- and ethnicity-based scholarships, and provide a resolution monitor with admissions data. UCLA Chancellor Julio Frenk said in a letter to the university community this week that $584 million 'is suspended and at risk.' The loss of those funds, Frenk said, would 'be devastating for UCLA and for Americans across the nation.' The Trump administration has already blocked more than $5 billion in funding from at least seven private universities: Harvard ($2.3 billion), Cornell ($1 billion), Northwestern ($790 million), Brown ($510 million), Columbia ($400 million), Duke ($108 million) and the University of Pennsylvania ($175 million). San Francisco Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, a Harvard Law grad, assessed the situation best. He described Trump's shakedown as 'classic mob boss behavior' and said 'far too many major institutions are caving to this fascist.' 'The idea that UCLA would pay Trump tribute (California taxpayer dollars), adopt his bigoted policies, or give him even an ounce of control of the University's operations turns my stomach and should turn the stomach of every Californian. I'm confident UCLA will not enter into such an agreement, since doing so would violate California law, would violate our state's core values, and would be straight up morally unacceptable,' Wiener wrote in a statement. Gov. Gavin Newsom also urged the UC to stay strong, unlike the paper tigers of the Ivy League, against what he described Friday as Trump 'threaten(ing) us through extortion with a billion-dollar fine unless we do his bidding.' 'We're not Brown, we're not Columbia, and I'm not going to be governor if we act like that, period full stop,' Newsom said Thursday in San Francisco when I asked him whether the UC should cut a deal with Trump. 'I will fight like hell to make sure that doesn't happen. There's principles, there's right and wrong, and we'll do the right thing. And what President Trump is doing is wrong, and everybody knows it.' On Friday, after the DOJ floated the $1 billion ransom, Newsom doubled down: 'We will not be complicit in this kind of attack on academic freedom, on this extraordinary public institution. We are not like some of those other institutions that have followed a different path.' California has always billed itself as a backstop against Trump. But it's hard to imagine a more clear and urgent test of whether it will live up to that role. There is a lot at stake here, as all 10 UC campuses rank among the top research universities in the world, according to the U.S. News & World Report 2025-26 Best Global Universities ranking in June. UC researchers produce four new inventions a day and the system is home to nearly 300 of the world's top researchers. Fueled by federal funding, UC researchers conduct 8% of all academic research in the U.S. (Full disclosure: I'm the very proud father of a UC Davis graduate. Go, Aggies!) Top UC campuses usually land near the Ivies in rankings of top colleges and compete for the nation's elite students. They frequently outperform the more expensive Ivies in terms of a financial return on investment, according to a 2022 study by Georgetown University's Center on Education and the Workforce. 'They have the power and the position and the funding to hold the line and serve as an example to universities,' Veena Dubal, a professor of law at UC Irvine and general counsel to the American Association of University Professors, told WBUR. Ivy Leaguers, meanwhile, love to brag about how many A-list lawyers they mint — including eight of the nine current Supreme Court Justices. But what good is all that power if they couldn't tap their elite alums to fight back against Trump? Instead, they wilted. They did what the wealthy often do when confronted with a difficult situation: They bought their way out. Columbia paid $220 million in 'tribute' to Don Donald. Brown paid $50 million to the state of Rhode Island, adopted the federal government's definition of 'male' and 'female,' and promised to remove any consideration of race from the admissions process, according to NPR. Harvard is willing to pay up to $500 million, the New York Times reported, a figure Harvard denied. The Ivy grads among you might be asking: Why doesn't the UC just pay Trump to go away? First, UC, which relies heavily on public funding, doesn't have the deep pockets the privately funded Ivies do. And there are strict rules on what the UC can tap its endowment for. (Paying off mob bosses is not on the list.) 'Withdrawals are limited to a portion of interest earnings from the funds and only a limited amount of annual earned income can be withdrawn and spent in any given year. Those funds are not sufficient to replace the state and federal funds that UC relies on for its day-to-day operating costs,' according to the UC. But there's a more existential reason the system cannot pay this ransom: As anyone familiar with a mob shakedown knows, once you start paying for 'protection,' you can't stop. Even more insidious is that Trump is cloaking his shakedown in the guise of addressing antisemitism on campus. To appease him, the Ivy League agreed to take certain Trump-approved steps to address such allegations. 'Trump is now using Jews as human shields to achieve political goals having nothing to do with antisemitism,' said Wiener, a co-chair of the Legislative Jewish Caucus who has faced antisemitic attacks while in office. 'Trump doesn't give a damn about Jews or antisemitism. He has antisemites in his Administration, he tried to elect a Nazi-aligned government in Germany, he dined with Nazi Nick Fuentes, and he spread antisemitic conspiracy theories. … Revoking science research funding in the name of the Jews is utterly is making Jews less safe, and he's making it harder for us to fight actual antisemitism.' So the next move is yours, UC. The system has long competed with the Ivies for students, talent and prestige. Now it could have the ultimate, well, trump card: It could say it refused to buckle when the very future of higher education was on the line.


Newsweek
26 minutes ago
- Newsweek
Trump Envoy Slammed for 'Damaging Incompetence' Over Putin Talks
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. President Donald Trump's U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff has been slammed for "damaging incompetence" over his talks with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. Posting on X, formerly Twitter, Michael McFaul, who served in the Barack Obama administration, including as U.S. ambassador to the Russian Federation, reacted to reports that Witkoff presented conflicting narratives about Putin's intentions in several calls with European leaders last week, creating confusion. Newsweek was unable to verify these reports and contacted Witkoff and the White House outside of normal business hours for comment. Why It Matters One of Trump's pledges during the 2024 presidential campaign was to end the war in Ukraine within 24 hours of taking office, but he has thus far failed to do so. In a renewed attempt to broker a peace deal between the warring countries, Witkoff met Putin on Wednesday for three hours of talks in what was his fifth trip to Moscow in his capacity as Trump's envoy. Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff, right, shake hands during their meeting in Moscow on August 6, 2025. Russian President Vladimir Putin, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump's special envoy Steve Witkoff, right, shake hands during their meeting in Moscow on August 6, 2025. Gavriil Grigorov, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP What To Know According to The Wall Street Journal, Witkoff presented Putin's ceasefire plan to European officials after he met with the Russian leader. Citing anonymous sources, the publication said Moscow was prepared to withdraw from the southern regions of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson in exchange for full control of Donetsk Oblast. The publication said that the next day, he presented a different claim—that Putin would withdraw and freeze the front line, and that during a third call, he said the Russian leader wanted Ukraine to withdraw from Donetsk in an exchange for a ceasefire. McFaul, now a Stanford University academic said: "This is deeply damaging incompetence. Witkoff should finally start taking a note taker from the U.S. embassy for future meetings. That's how professional diplomacy works." Meanwhile, other figures also criticized Witkoff. Journalist Michael Weiss wrote: "The U.S. envoy is grossly incompetent and his confusion is causing diplomatic crises." Garry Kasparov, a Russian chess grandmaster and political activist wrote: "Like so most of Trump's appointees, Witkoff's only qualification is that Trump is sure he will put Trump's personal interests and desires over American national interests without a second thought. Of course he's incompetent." What People Are Saying Writing on Truth Social about the meeting, President Donald Trump said: "My special envoy, Steve Witkoff, just had a highly productive meeting with Russian president Vladimir Putin. Great progress was made! Afterwards, I updated some of our European allies. Everyone agrees this war must come to a close, and we will work towards that in the days and weeks to come." What Happens Next Trump is scheduled to meet Putin in Alaska on August 15 as part of his efforts to secure a ceasefire in Ukraine.

Business Insider
26 minutes ago
- Business Insider
Burkina Faso upgrades defence with delivery of Chinese-made armoured vehicles, artillery systems
Burkina Faso has taken delivery of a significant shipment of Chinese-made armoured vehicles and artillery systems, highlighting a growing shift among African militaries toward Beijing's defence industry. Burkina Faso received Chinese-made armoured vehicles and artillery systems, signaling a shift towards Beijing's defense industry. The delivery includes VN22B vehicles, PLL-05 gun-mortars, and SR5 rocket systems, enhancing operational capabilities. China's military equipment gains traction in Africa due to competitive pricing, fast delivery, and flexible financing options. According to Defense Blog, the delivery includes VN22B wheeled fire support vehicles, PLL-05 120 mm self-propelled gun-mortars, and SR5 multiple rocket launch systems. Footage posted on social media showed rows of the newly painted vehicles in desert and tropical camouflage at a port facility before onward transport to the landlocked West African nation. The VN22B, developed by China's Norinco, is equipped with a turret-mounted cannon and advanced targeting systems, optimised for both urban and open-terrain engagements. The PLL-05 combines mortar and direct-fire gun capabilities for flexible support, while the SR5 rocket system can deploy both guided and unguided munitions for precision or saturation strikes. Although Burkina Faso's Ministry of Defence has not disclosed the financial terms of the acquisition, details on the method of payment remain unclear. However, given World Bank's SIPRI-based data showing that the country's arms imports fell to $1 million in 2022 from $28 million in 2021, with an average annual value of $5.76 million since 1961, and considering the country's strained public finances, defence analysts say it is uncertain whether the purchase was made through direct payment, concessional loans, barter or deferred arrangements. Minister of Defence, Brigadier General Kassoum Coulibaly has previously confirmed that the procurement is part of a multi-phase modernisation plan announced by the Junta leader, Captain Ibrahim Traoré on 31 December 2023, aimed at equipping the armed forces for high-intensity operations in the Sahel. Chinese-made military hardware gains ground in Africa Recall that In June 2024, Burkina Faso received earlier batches of Chinese armoured vehicles, including CS/VP14 and VP11 mine-resistant ambush-protected (MRAP) units, under a modernisation programme, according to Military Africa. Chinese military equipment has become increasingly visible across Africa. The VP11 armoured vehicle, also manufactured by Norinco, is already in service with Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, and Mali, while Kenya fields the CS/VP14 mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicle. The appeal lies in competitive pricing, fast delivery, and flexible financing, factors that have made China an attractive alternative to traditional Western suppliers. Ouagadougou has also expanded procurement beyond China. In the past year, Burkina Faso has acquired Egyptian-made Buffalo E10 mine-resistant vehicles and Turkish Ejder Yalçın armoured personnel carriers, reflecting a deliberate policy of supplier diversification.