Latest news with #Napoleonic
Time of India
2 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Russia an 'immediate' threat, China a 'sophisticated' one: What UK defence review warns against
The United Kingdom's defence review has warned against 'immediate and pressing' threat from Russia, meanwhile, China poses a 'sophisticated and persistent challenge'. The government's strategic review is set to be concluded on Monday, the Guardian reported. A 130-page document authored by three advisers to UK PM Keir Starmer also suggested on drawing extensively on lessons from the war in Ukraine. While Russia was the central concern, the document also highlighted China, that has at times cooperated with Moscow. It further identified Iran and North Korea as smaller but significant 'regional disruptors.' According to the report, Britain was entering 'a new era of threat,' as drones, artificial intelligence, and other emerging technologies were transforming the nature of warfare more profoundly than ever before. The analysis is not expected to announce new defence spending commitments but will reaffirm Starmer's February pledge to raise the defence budget to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, and to 3% in the following parliament. However, the document is likely to support a major medium-term spending increase—potentially exceeding £50 billion in real terms—that may be agreed at the upcoming Nato summit in June. There, Western allies are considering a proposal to raise core defence spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2032, with an additional 1.5% dedicated to cyber and infrastructure efforts, partly in response to mounting pressure from US President Donald Trump. It is also expected to address the issue of British army size, as tensions continue between the ministry of defence and the treasury over whether to commit to increasing troop numbers beyond the current target of 73,000. This comes amid fresh figures revealing that the army's strength has fallen to 70,860 full-time trained soldiers as of 1 April—its lowest level since the Napoleonic era—marking a 2.3% decline over the past year. Meanwhile, US defense secretary Pete Hegseth has also warned Indo-Pacific allies of an "imminent threat" from China, reassuring them that they would not face growing military and economic pressure from the country alone.
Mint
7 hours ago
- Business
- Mint
UK Shifts to War Footing With ‘Always-On' Munitions Production
The UK will create an 'always on' munitions production capacity to allow it to scale-up its defense industry when needed, as it increasingly shifts to a war footing with Russia's assault on Ukraine showing little sign of ending. Prime Minister Keir Starmer's government will invest £1.5 billion to build six munitions factories, designed to bolster its defense industry and stockpile weapons to meet greater demand, the Ministry of Defence said. The review will also focus on the UK's 'warfighting readiness' designed to deter enemies. The move comes ahead of the publication of a new defense strategy on Monday that'll set out the biggest threats Britain faces and whether it has the resources to meet them. The UK's ordnance stockpiles have run dry following decades of under-investment as well as the recent support for Ukraine. While it does manufacture much of its own munitions, a decision by the last Labour government meant that it outsourced its explosives manufacturing to the likes of the US and France. The UK, is in part, addressing its chronic reluctance to invest in its own defense industry for decades, which has seen the size of its own army fall to its smallest since the Napoleonic era. It recently announced that the new strategy will 'end the hollowing out' of the UK armed forces, which loses as many as 300 personnel a month, by investing an additional £1.5 billion to improve military accommodation. 'We are strengthening the UK's industrial base to better deter our adversaries and make the UK secure at home and strong abroad,' John Healey, the Defence Secretary, said. The Ministry of Defence declined to say which defense companies would build the new factories. The additional funding, which will take the UK's munitions spend to £6 billion over the next four years, will create more than 1,000 new jobs and help the armed forces endure prolonged campaigns and support them in warfare, the ministry said. The government has also promised to invest more than £1 billion to establish a 'Digital Targeting Web' to better connect Britain's weapons systems and speed-up decisions for targeting enemy threats on the battlefield. The review, to be published Monday, is also in response to US President Donald Trump's demand that Europe take more responsibility for its own security, and the increasing military and cyber threats against the UK. Just weeks after Trump came into office, Starmer announced that the UK would increase defense spending from 2.3% to 2.5% by 2027, with a further rise to 3% in the next parliament, to bolster its military capabilities. UK defense chiefs have privately warned the government that plans to raise military funding to 2.5% of economic output won't be enough and cuts will still need to be made as a result of the underfunding. Starmer's office and the Treasury were told earlier this year that the 0.2% increase will merely allow the UK to stand still and maintain current capabilities, Bloomberg reported in February. UK Military Chiefs Warn Treasury 2.5% Spending Goal Falls Short Despite the significance of the review, Starmer's administration is likely to come under pressure to increase its spending on defense even further as Europe and NATO look to up investment at its June summit. That target is set to be 5% of economic output, with 3.5% on hard defense spending, and 1.5% on military-related expenditures like cyber and border security by 2032. This article was generated from an automated news agency feed without modifications to text.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
3 days ago
- Business
- Business Standard
UK taps Ukraine lessons to invest GBP 1 billion into warfare systems
In its strategic defense review, expected to be published in full next week, the UK will also set up a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command to protect military networks Bloomberg The UK will invest more than £1 billion ($1.4 billion) in a new digital targeting system to allow the country's armed forces to pinpoint and eliminate enemy targets more swiftly as part of a forthcoming revamp of Britain's defensive capabilities. In its strategic defense review, expected to be published in full next week, the UK will also set up a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command to protect military networks against tens of thousands of cyber attacks a year and help coordinate Britain's own cyber operations, the Ministry of Defence said Thursday in a statement. The command will also lead operations to jam enemy signals to drones and missiles and help intercept military communications. The new funding forms part of the government's commitment to increase defense spending to 2.5 per cent of economic output by 2027 and is the first announcement from the long-awaited defense review. The MoD vowed the new strategy would 'end the hollowing out' of the UK Armed Forces — the army is at its smallest size since the Napoleonic era — and focus on driving innovation in its defense industry over the next decade. Still, the UK is likely to come under pressure to increase its spending further, as NATO begins negotiations with members to adopt a new target at its June summit. That target is set to be 5 per cent of economic output, with 3.5 per cent on hard defense spending, and 1.5 per cent on military-related expenditures like cyber and border security. The £1 billion UK investment will help establish a 'Digital Targeting Web' by 2027 to better connect Britain's weapons systems to speed-up decisions for targeting enemy threats on the battlefield. The MOD said a threat could be identified by a sensor on a ship or in space before being disabled by one of its fighter jets or drones, through enhanced communication between its armed forces.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Plans to convert historic towers into holiday lets
An East Sussex council is due to consider plans which would see two historic military towers turned into holiday lets. The plans, submitted to Eastbourne Borough Council's (EBC) planning committee, would see internal and external conversions to Martello Towers 66 and 64 near Sovereign Harbour and the Crumbles respectively. The proposals have the support of Historic England and local heritage group The Eastbourne Society. However, critics have raised concerns about noise, parking, wildlife impact and light pollution. Martello Towers were originally built to serve as military defences during the Napoleonic era. Specific works on the Grade II listed structures include roof extensions, solar panel installations and the construction of new access staircases to turn them into short-term holiday lets. In a statement reproduced within a report to the planning committee, a spokesman for Historic England said the heritage and public benefits "outweigh the harm", according to the Local Democracy Reporting Service (LDRS). It said the works would "likely remove the assets from the Heritage At Risk register". The applications, submitted by Robert Adams, have been recommended for approval with the committee report noting the applicant had worked "closely with Historic England over the last few years" on proposed designs. Both applications received 54 objection letters each, citing concerns over privacy for local residents and sea flooding works conducted by the Environment Agency (EA). The EA had initially raised concerns about the proposals but has since withdrawn its objections subject to conditions. EBC's planning committee is due to consider the applications on 3 June. Follow BBC Sussex on Facebook, on X, and on Instagram. Send your story ideas to southeasttoday@ or WhatsApp us on 08081 002250. The Eastbourne Society Historic England Environment Agency Eastbourne Borough Council Local Democracy Reporting Service Coastal fort to get £118k overhaul Martello tower history project needs volunteers Sea defences swept away near towers
Hans India
5 days ago
- Politics
- Hans India
The cost of modern warfare goes beyond bullets
War seems to have been an inevitable companion throughout the journey of the human race since evolution. War is normally viewed as a conflict between political groups or countries and is treated as an institution recognised as a law-unto-itself. War has been an important topic for analysts across centuries. Over a period of time it has evolved in many forms – from arrows and spears to bullets, to missiles, to chemical, biological, technological and economic. Whatever is the form, it directly or indirectly results in loss of lives, physical destruction, fall in economic activity and long-term social and economic ramifications. Multiple perspectives on war: Theories of war indicate varying focuses of interests like philosophical, political, economic, sociological and psychological. However, war is an extremely complex phenomenon that can be triggered from any sort of emotional outburst or such factors and not necessarily from any single approach. In the middle of the 17th century, wars were fought to spread religious interests across sovereigns. The French Revolution brought about fundamental changes by broadening the objectives that saw an increase in sizes from small forces to large armed armies. It is apt to recall Leo Tolstoy's 1859 magnum opus 'War and Peace'. It depicts a broad panoramic view of the Russian society during the Napoleonic wars. He is said to have meticulously researched these wars by visiting the battlefields to portray a lucid depiction of human experience and suffering by the society and the people irrespective of their wealth, rank and profile. He is quite articulate while describing the military strategies and the impact of warfare on soldiers, peasants, and the common people as also the elite class. World War I resulted in a massive devastation of people and economies that lasted pretty long to eventually pave the way for a school of thought that equated war as a horrific social disaster that adversely impacted humanity as a whole. By World War II (1939-45) and the subsequent evolution of mass destructive weapons, war became a social phenomenon where the protagonists and all those involved in the conflict had to come clear on what led to the conflict, which were in varying types. There are many schools of thought that tried to analyze the causes for going to war and zeroed in on two broad drivers- innate aggressive behaviour that is caused due to rivalry or intrusion or frustration caused by an activity, and psychological, which makes it difficult to explain the actual cause as people behave differently vis-à-vis social contexts. Price of war: The Kiel Institute for the world Economy- a research institute in Germany for globalization issues investigated the cost of more than 150 wars since 1870. They used historical data to calculate the expected economic damage caused by the Ukraine war, which is estimated to touch a cumulative GDP loss of around $120 billion by 2026. The capital stock of Ukraine would fall by more than $950 billion. For countries that are not directly involved in the war the costs are $250 billion of which $20 billion are attributable to Germany alone and $70 billion to the European Union. Weaponisation in modern era: As Prime Minister Narendra Modi has said this is not the era of war. Modern day wars are fought not just with weapons but with the wallets of economies. For instance, the Russia-Ukraine conflict has created a significant energy crisis, disrupted supply chains leading to inflation and exacerbated economic slowdown. It also increased uncertainty in the global trade and financial markets leading to financial instability. As for Gaza, according to a World Bank report, 35 per cent decline in the real GDP was reported in the first quarter of 2024 for Palestinian territories marking the largest economic contraction and its gap was projected to reach $1.86 billion in 2024 posing risks of systemic failure. The US is waging trade wars with tariff strikes across countries. Although no one has a clue as to what President Donald Trump has gained by striking the tariffs first and pausing them, almost all countries are enormously relieved by this rethink. A good aspect about these trade wars is that not a single life was lost and there were no destructions, whatsoever. It gave a chance to correct the mistakes by reversing decisions. Prices were brought back to stability as both the US and China mellowed from their earlier postures. However, this reversal provides only a temporary relief to markets and consumers. It is not tariffs per se, the actual problem is uncertainty. Businesses need a stable environment to be assured of a steady inflow of investments. However, they caused huge turmoil in the international world economies with supersonic speed. With surging oil prices and soaring food costs, many countries are struggling to contain inflation and protect their broken supply chains. The fact is that these have far-reaching consequences compared to fiercest of wars. Modern warfare is predominantly using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to detect the target and destroy. It looks like we are in the saga of unending conflicts where, 'War is a place where young people who don't know each other and don't hate each other but kill each other, based on decision made by people who know each other and hate each other but don't kill each other' – Paul Valery In these wars nobody actually wins, the losers are the common people and soldiers on both sides. The AI-driven wars and conflicts benefit none other than the defence industry at the cost of finances and loss of human lives. According to sources, the costs in the India-Pakistan conflict translated approximately to Rs. 15, 000 crore for India, while it cost Pakistan around $249.6 million. The modern times have witnessed a shift from conventional physical combat in the battlefield to airspace, cyberspace, financial markets and psychological operations. Today's battlefield is more complex and invisible and can target enemy bases with a surgical precision by the click of a mouse. Nevertheless, it leaves deep scars and cause ecological damage while generations to come will carry psychological trauma of violence, loss and financial instability. Today, the challenge is not just about deliberating how to end wars but understanding their new faces and anticipating its deep destructive effects. Policymakers must not only redefine what victory means in this interconnected world and also remain vigilant and strategically invested in peace. (The writer is Associate Professor in Finance at Christ University)
