Latest news with #GeorgeRobertson
Daily Mail
5 hours ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Minister's confusion on funding betrays the disarray at the heart of the MoD, by former British Army colonel PHILIP INGRAM
Keir Starmer is unveiling his Strategic Defence Review with great fanfare. Headed by former Nato chief George Robertson, it has been billed as a 'root and branch review' of our military policy, pointing the way to 'a new era for defence'. How pitiful then that the announcement is overshadowed by the Defence Secretary quibbling over how much the Government is willing to spend. Last week, John Healey declared there was 'no doubt' the UK would hit its target of spending 3 per cent of GDP (from the current 2.3 per cent) on defence by 2034, promising a 'certain decade of rising defence spending'. Yet the commitment seems less than cast iron, as Healey yesterday retreated to the language of 'aims' and 'ambitions' when referring to the target. If he doesn't know how much he's spending on the eve of the Strategic Defence Review then what confidence can we have in any of his and Starmer's promises? It betrays a disarray at the heart of the department, for the Secretary of State's main job is to get the money right. That aside, some of the Review's proposals already in the public domain are welcome – in particular, the revelation that the Government will build six new munitions factories, given that our defence industrial capacity has been depleted for decades. Supplying arms to Ukraine since 2022 has severely diminished our stocks. Expanding home-grown munitions manufacturing will allow us to replenish our stores and reduce our reliance on the Americans and Germans. And the jobs it will create, including hundreds of highly skilled roles, can only be a good thing. The Government's decision to build up to 12 attack submarines as part of the Aukus programme run by Australia, the UK and US will also create thousands of jobs. Questions remain, though, on just how many of these subs will come under the Royal Navy's command or go to the Royal Australian Navy. Any expansion of our conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarine fleet must also be matched by investment in recruiting and retraining personnel, as the service struggles to man its fleet as it is. Navy's command or go to the Royal Australian Navy. Any expansion of our conventionally armed, nuclear-powered submarine fleet must also be matched by investment in recruiting and retraining personnel, as the service struggles to man its fleet as it is. It would also appear that the Government is finally taking seriously the possibility of the UK coming under ballistic missile attack, with the review promising to introduce new defensive 'shields '. While an Israel-style Iron Dome system to intercept long-range aerial attacks sounds enticing, it would be prohibitively expensive to envelop the whole of the British Isles. But we do need much more than the nothing we have today – namely, missile defences over key targets like government buildings, airfields and manufacturing hubs. However, the announcement of 7,000 new British-built 'missiles' is worrying if that number also includes attack drones, as Healey has indicated. If actual missiles turn out to be a small proportion of this total, such a move will hardly jangle nerves in Moscow or Beijing. The Russians launch hundreds of drones and missiles at Ukraine most nights and the Chinese have over 10,000 missiles ready to fire. And when it comes to drones, what type are we investing in? The Houthi rebels in Yemen have made light work of taking out the US's £22 million MQ-9 Reaper drones, downing six of them since March. We need to expand and diversify our stocks, training soldiers to operate lightweight, cheap drones, in particular, which have proved so nimble and deadly above the steppes of Ukraine. So while there is much to welcome in this review, there is also much more to be done. Elsewhere, reports emerged yesterday that the Government is in highly sensitive talks to buy F35A jets, which can carry nuclear bombs. This would broaden our nuclear deterrent beyond our four Vanguard-class submarines but would also tie us to yet more US technology. The jet can use only the B61-12 bomb – stocks of which are controlled by the Pentagon. Nor would the jet, which needs a longer runway to take off, be compatible with the Royal Navy's two aircraft carriers – so the decks of HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales will remain embarrassingly bare. And we are still shamefully unable to train our own pilots. The current Hawk T2 training aircraft is so unreliable that the RAF is sending new pilots overseas to earn their wings. A replacement must be announced. On the ground, our armoured personnel carriers lack anti-tank systems, making them little more than battlefield taxis. The troops they carry will also be horribly exposed on any future frontline because they have virtually no air cover, due to so few aircraft, pilots and drones. The latest hi-tech kit is always welcome but it's useless without the personnel to put it to use in action. One thing the Ukraine war has taught us is that troop numbers are important – and we desperately need more recruits in every branch of the Armed Forces. Today, Healey is expected to set a long-term target for increasing the size of the Army, but I suspect that increase will largely come from a mooted 'Home Guard' force, which will be established to protect domestic infrastructure, such as nuclear power plants. If the review does not commit us to expand the Army to at least 100,000 full-time soldiers (up from 73,000), we will remain incapable of prosecuting a land offensive in eastern Europe were Russia to invade a Nato ally, at a time when the US is retreating from the theatre. It is painfully clear, given the current budgetary restraints, that the developments the Defence Secretary announces today are unlikely to get the UK anywhere close to being 'war ready'.
NDTV
a day ago
- Business
- NDTV
Russia "Immediate" Danger, China "Sophisticated" Challenge: Key UK Report
London: UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government is set to publish the strategic defence review on Monday, which is expected to warn of challenges posed by Russia and China. The review, a 10-year plan for military equipment and services, will warn of the "immediate and pressing" danger posed by Russia, according to a report by British newspaper The Guardian on Saturday. The 130-page document, prepared by a team headed by former NATO secretary general George Robertson, will also describe China as a "sophisticated and persistent challenge", which at times has been willing to cooperate with Russia, and two smaller "regional disruptors" - Iran and North Korea, the report said. Since the war broke out in Ukraine in 2022, Russia has signed key deals with several of the West's adversaries, China, Iran and North Korea. The review, which was put together by Mr Robertson alongside Fiona Hill, a former US presidential advisor, and Richard Barrons, a former British commander, is also likely to question the size of the British army, which currently is around 1 lakh. On Saturday, the European Union's top diplomat, Kaja Kallas, also said that Europe saw the China-Russia threat as the world's "greatest challenge". "When China and Russia speak of leading together changes not seen in a hundred years and of revisions of the global security order, we should all be extremely worried," Ms Kallas told an audience at the Shangri-La security conference in Singapore. "If you are worried about China, you should be worried about Russia," she added. Six New Weapons Factories In UK The UK government on Saturday said it will build at least six new factories producing weapons and explosives as part of a major review of its defence capabilities. The Ministry of Defence said that the Mr Starmer-led government will invest more than £1 billion in 'Digital Targeting Web' to "spearhead battlefield engagements, applying lessons learnt from Ukraine to the UK Armed Forces". "The hard-fought lessons from Putin's illegal war in Ukraine leave us under no illusions that future conflicts will be won through forces that are better connected, better equipped and innovating faster than their adversaries," Defence Secretary John Healey said in a statement. "We will give our Armed Forces the ability to act at speeds never seen before - connecting ships, aircraft, tanks and operators so they can share vital information instantly and strike further and faster," he added.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
The Guardian: UK's strategic review will point to "immediate and pressing" threat from Russia
The UK is facing a "new era of threat" when drones, artificial intelligence and other technologies are changing the nature of war more fundamentally than ever before in history. Source: the UK government's strategic defence review, which is expected to be presented on Monday, as European Pravda reports with reference to the Guardian The 130-page document, written by three advisers to UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer, will warn of the "immediate and pressing" danger from Russia and is expected to draw heavily on lessons learned from the war in Ukraine. It will also focus on China, which will be described not as an enemy but as a "sophisticated and persistent challenge" that is sometimes willing to cooperate with Moscow, and two smaller "regional disruptors" in the form of Iran and North Korea. The review depicts the gravest military and security threat since the end of the Cold War, although it stops short of suggesting that Moscow's heightened cyber and sabotage activities mean the UK is already sliding towards war with Russia. The analysis, prepared by a group of experts led by former NATO Secretary General George Robertson, is not expected to contain any new commitments to defence spending. Instead, it will reiterate Starmer's February pledge to raise defence spending to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 and to 3% during the next parliament. However, the review is likely to serve as justification for a substantial increase in medium-term defence spending, expected to be agreed upon at the NATO summit in June and potentially exceeding £50 billion (around US$6.65 billion) in real terms. The review is also expected to address the size of the British army as the Ministry of Defence and the Treasury are reportedly at loggerheads over whether to commit to increasing the planned number of 73,000 personnel. Figures released this week show that the army's size has fallen to its lowest level since Napoleon and even before: as of 1 April, the number of soldiers in full-time military training stood at 70,860, down 2.3% on the previous year. Assuming recruitment is successful, any commitment to increase army numbers by 5,000 would cost around £2.5 billion (approx. US$3.08 billion) a year in additional salaries, housing, kit and other resources. But if it does succeed, it would help the armed forces meet commitments that are likely to grow in the coming years. Background: The British military will spend over £1 billion (US$1.35 billion) on artificial intelligence and a hacking team. NATO has proposed that cybersecurity and border and coastal security costs be included in the Alliance's new target of 1.5% of GDP for "pre-military" spending. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
The Guardian
2 days ago
- Business
- The Guardian
‘New era of threat' amid changing face of war, UK defence review to warn
Britain is facing 'a new era of threat' with drones, artificial intelligence and other technologies changing the nature of warfare more fundamentally than at any other point in history, the government's strategic defence review is expected to conclude on Monday. The 130-page document written by three advisers to the prime minister, Keir Starmer, will warn of the 'immediate and pressing' danger posed by Russia and is expected to try to draw heavily on lessons learned from the war in Ukraine. But it will also focus on China, not described as an enemy but as a 'sophisticated and persistent challenge', which at times has been willing to cooperate with Moscow, and two smaller 'regional disruptors' – Iran and North Korea. It will paint a picture of the most heightened military and security threat since the end of the cold war, though it falls short of saying that the intensity of Moscow's cyber and sabotage activities means the UK has already drifted into a war with Russia. The analysis, put together by a team headed by the former Nato secretary general George Robertson, is not expected to set out fresh commitments for defence spending. Instead, it will reiterate a commitment made by Starmer in February to increase the defence budget to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 and to 3% in the next parliament. But it is likely to be used to help justify a significant expansion in medium-term defence spending that is expected to be agreed at the Nato summit later in June that could amount to more than £50bn in real terms. Members of the western alliance are discussing a proposal to increase core defence spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2032, with a further 1.5% for cyber and infrastructure initiatives, in response to pressure from Donald Trump. This week Mark Rutte, Nato's secretary general, said he expected the June summit in The Hague would see allies agree on 'a high defence spend target' of 5% in total, including a figure 'considerably north of 3%' on pure defence spending. The review is also expected to refer to the question of the size of the British army, amid reports that the Ministry of Defence and Treasury have been battling over whether to include a commitment to increase numbers from the target of 73,000. Figures out this week show that the size of the army has dropped below the target to the lowest level since the Napoleonic era and earlier, with the number of full-time trained soldiers at 70,860 on 1 April, down 2.3% over the preceding year. A military source said the defence secretary, John Healey, a persistent critic of falling army size in opposition, had won a commitment to increase the army by a few thousand, but the Ministry of Defence said it did not recognise the speculation. A commitment to increase army numbers by 5,000, if the recruitment can be achieved, would cost about £2.5bn a year in extra pay, accommodation, kit and other resources. But if successful, it would help the military be able to meet what are likely to be growing overseas commitments in the years ahead. Britain and France have agreed to lead a multinational 'reassurance force' of up to 30,000 to help keep the peace in Ukraine and keep its air and seaports open if Russia signs up to a durable ceasefire, though so far Vladimir Putin has been unwilling to do so, despite pleas from Trump to stop the war. Sign up to First Edition Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters after newsletter promotion Peter Ricketts, a former national security adviser, said that while it would make sense for the MoD to spend more on drones, cyber capabilities and artificial intelligence, 'another lesson of Ukraine is that mass counts, in terms of manpower and equipment' – and that resourcing of 3.5% of GDP would ultimately be necessary. An extra £1.5bn is to be allocated by the MoD for improving military accommodation, including urgent upgrades for the 1,000 worst homes, while there will be plans to create a volunteer home guard to protect airports and other sensitive sites from drone or other unexpected attacks by hostile states and terrorists. The other members of the review panel were the retired general Sir Richard Barrons and Fiona Hill, a former Russia adviser to Donald Trump, who has previously said that 'structurally' world war three has already begun because the international norms of behaviour have been eroded by Russia in Ukraine and by fighting in the Middle East. Lord Robertson, the chair of the panel, previously described Russia, China, North Korea and Iran as a 'deadly quartet' who were increasingly working together. Iran has emerged as a supplier of drones to Russia while China provides components for weapons – and North Korea has sent troops to fight against Ukraine. Starmer is expected to unveil the outline review at an event on Monday before Healey lays the full document before parliament.
CBC
3 days ago
- Business
- CBC
The time when foreign invasions were impossible is over, former diplomats tell defence conference
Social Sharing At the onset of the First World War, Britain's veritable foreign secretary, Sir Edward Grey, remarked that the lamps were going out all over Europe and "we shall not see them lit again in our lifetime." The metaphor has long been considered as the unofficial epitaph to what at the time was the longest run of peace and prosperity on the continent. The retelling of that story has become commonplace since the invasion of Ukraine. It was hard not to think of it this week when listening to both a former NATO secretary general and the man who was Lithuania's foreign minister as they each delivered stark assessments of where the world is going and how it got here. Neither Lord George Robertson, who led the Western military alliance from 1999 to 2003, nor Gabrielius Landsbergis, the Baltic nation's top diplomat for years, argued that we're on the cusp of war. Rather, they both called for clear-eyed deterrence as they delivered separate, sobering messages at the Canadian Association of Defence and Security Industries annual gathering of defence contractors in Ottawa, known as CANSEC. Even still. The post-Cold War era where nations didn't have to worry about their sovereignty and territorial defence is over, Robertson told the conference. "That world has evaporated, and it will not return even in our children's lifetime," he said. NATO's Article 5 — the pledge of collective defence and that an attack on one was an attack on all — gets all of the attention, Robertson said. But he argued that the third article of the Washington Treaty, which established NATO in 1949, will get more and more attention in the coming months and years. That clause says members must have the individual and collective capacity to resist an armed attack. "In other words, there is an obligation to defend your own homeland, an obligation that was, too often in the past, overlooked as we've looked at the [terrorist] enemy abroad," Robertson said. "There's no longer room for business as usual." It's been that way for more than a decade, he said, following the Russian annexation of Crimea. "As we see every day in the east of Ukraine, the threat of naked aggression and wonton violence in the Euro Atlantic region — it's no longer theoretical, no longer just a remote possibility," Robertson said. "It's real. It's brutal and it's very, very close to us." The challenge today for nations, including Canada, is to stop believing that some things, such as invasions, are impossible. "We need to be alert and wide awake," said Robertson, who admitted in a later interview to being frustrated with Canada's anemic record of defence spending. But he added he's encouraged to see promises to do more from Prime Minister Mark Carney's government. Canada is hoping to soon sign on to a major $1.25-trillion European Union defence-industrial plan known as ReArm Europe. Landsbergis was intensely critical of European leaders, who he says have been hitting the snooze button on defence since the 2008 Russian invasion of neighbouring Georgia. His reaction to the ReArm Europe plan could be summed up in two words: about time. "We're finally starting to see our leaders talk about serious money," Landsbergis said. "The European ReArm plan might be the first step in the right direction." Landsbergis said Europe simply allowed the crisis to build following Russia's annexation of Crimea, rather than taking decisive action. It has been, he said, a wasted decade. "During that time, Europeans said all the right things, but unfortunately very little preparation," Landsbergis said. "After the 2022 [Ukraine] invasion, there was hope that the situation would change dramatically and European factories would start rolling out tanks, howitzers and ammunition. This happened, but not to the extent that one would have hoped." WATCH | Canada plans military buildup in the Arctic: Canada plans Arctic military expansion as part of sovereignty push 15 days ago Duration 2:02 Canada is planning a major Arctic military expansion, boosting its presence by several months each year and inviting more NATO troops to join. The move aims to assert sovereignty and respond to pressure from U.S. President Donald Trump. NATO does its best to put things in context, saying over the past decade, European allies and Canada have steadily increased their collective investment in defence — from 1.43 per cent of their combined gross domestic product in 2014, to 2.02 per cent in 2024. (Canada currently sits at 1.37 percent of GDP) The increase represents $485 billion US in defence, the alliance says. Landsbergis's criticism, however, was not restricted to the political establishment. He said defence contractors and the corporate world have been equally stuck on the notion of business as usual. "Every conversation I had with defense industry representatives during the years of war would end with a phrase: 'I'm not building anything until you show me the money,'" he said. "And that was the crux of the problem. Europe would talk nice but spend little and business leaders, Putin or anyone who's good at math would see right through it." The lack of urgency, Landsbergis said, was evident in Ukraine's life-and-death fight to hold the line from the advancing Russian army. As a Lithuanian who understands life under Russian occupation, the arming of Ukraine in fits and starts was painful to watch, he said. "Whenever another baby step is taken, I must show gratitude and whisper to myself, 'Better late than never,'" Landsbergis said.
