Britain cannot defend itself on the cheap
Politics Notebook #14: Sir John Major has called for military spending to take priority over tax cuts. He’s right.
A useful thing about former prime ministers is that, unburdened of the need to win votes, they can be candid in a way that current leaders cannot.
Sir John Major occasionally fulfils this function and did again yesterday in an interview with Andrew Neil. Sir John used the conversation to raise the alarm about the parlous state of Britain’s defences.
He said:
We will be making a mistake if we turn away over the next few years to the necessary expenditure that must go into the armed forces. If you look at where the armed forces are, much of their equipment is now out of date, their manpower is surely at rock bottom, and if we wish to remain a power in the world who are an important ally, then we are going to have to look at our effectiveness in terms of hard power. I think there is no question in my mind at all that that is going to be an essential part of the next decade.
Perhaps the most provocative part of his argument was his assertion that, faced with a choice between increasing defence spending and handing out pre-election tax cuts, Chancellor Jeremy Hunt should opt for the former. As it stands, that looks unlikely. Hunt reportedly plans to direct resources away from military hardware and preparedness into tax relief.
Sir John is not the only figure speaking out, with the top brass warning that a failure to properly fund Britain’s defences could leave the country vulnerable.
Former Army commander Colonel Hamish de Bretton-Gordon tells the Daily Mail:
This is absolute lunacy. Tragically, no political party in this country sees defence spending as a vote winner; alas, Vladimir Putin does. The threats to the UK have never been greater. When I fought in the Gulf War 34 years ago the Army was three times the size it is now — we had 500 tanks. With the Russians charging west, we would struggle to raise 50. It is bonkers that we cannot spend more on defence.
Ex Royal Navy commander Tom Sharpe says:
The services can't magically get better at spending money, which is seemingly what the Treasury expects. So they will have to cut stuff — we've been doing it for decades really.
The UK currently spends 2.2% of its GDP on defence but has fallen from fourth to sixth place worldwide in total spend. In GDP terms, Britain lags behind Poland (2.4%), Greece (3.7%) and Singapore (2.8%), as well as hostile states such as Iran (2.6%) and Russia (4.1%).
In a report issued last month, the Commons defence select committee warned that the ‘hollowing out’ of the armed forces since 2010 meant Britain had been ‘unable to devote sufficient training and resources to high-intensity war fighting’. If the UK were to find itself at war, the army would run out of resources ‘after the first couple of months’.
Committee chairman Jeremy Quin said:
While able to deploy at short notice and to fulfil commitments, our inquiry found that readiness for all-out, prolonged war has received insufficient attention and needs intense ongoing focus. The high tempo of operations and unrelenting pressure on our services has led to a drop in retention, compounded by a period of low recruitment and difficulties introducing and maintaining capabilities, thereby creating a vicious cycle.
The UK will have to choose: vote-buying tax giveaways or national security. Those of an isolationist mindset, who would like to pretend that Britain can pull up the drawbridge and not worry about the outside world, are engaging in a perilous fantasy.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, China’s ongoing threats to Taiwan and the conflict in the Middle East are all felt here at home, in everything from spikes in asylum-seekers and pressures on trade to public unrest and hostile operations on UK soil. Put bluntly, a country that cannot defend its borders from economic migrants crossing the Channel in small boats cannot afford to be complacent about its national defences. Tax cuts are ideal. Sovereignty and security are indispensable.
The UK must beat its addiction to short-termist policies and face up to the many growing threats of an evermore dangerous world. The first step is reversing the reckless downgrading of our defences and restoring our ability to protect ourselves from rogue states and other hostile actors. That will require investment and the political will and courage to make hard but vital choices.
If we want to spend more on defence (or anything) we need to grow the economy. No party seems to take that seriously