|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: Britain
Britain: government reports, leaks to media promote military
build-up
By Steve James
8 February 2000
Use
this version to print
The last two months have seen a series of leaks, reports, and
parliamentary questions on the state of Britain's "war readiness".
Despite the sensitive nature of this information, no action
has been taken to find the source of the leaks. It is likely that
the leaks are part of an orchestrated campaign by sections of
the military and the political establishment to justify substantial
increases in military spending.
* In an unprecedented disclosure, a Ministry of Defence (MoD)
spokesman announced that the Royal Navy is facing a £500
million budget deficit. A funding crisis meant that the Navy had
been forced to cancel one exercise, withdraw 14 ships from another
and even impose a 15-knot speed limit on its frigates to save
fuel.
* A letter on the "parlous" state of the Defence
Medical Services, from Admiral Sir John Brigstocke, was leaked
to the BBC. The letter claimed that 1,500 sailors had been invalided
out of the Navy because proper treatment cannot be afforded and
that the number of military doctors is less than half its required
strength.
* Other reports, also "leaked" to the BBC, alleged
British military operations against Serbia were weakened by lack
of resources, which meant some troops having to buy their own
camp beds or navigation equipment. The reports claim that, under
these circumstances, a British land invasion would have ended
in military disaster.
This information has come out at a point when the British military
is genuinely over-stretched. Since 1997, 38 overseas missions
have been carried out, including continuing operations against
Iraq, in Kosovo and in East Timor. In contrast to the relative
stability of the Cold War period, these operations are generally
violent, rapidly prepared, and justified as humanitarian or peacekeeping
missions. In addition, garrisons are maintained in such dispersed
regions as the Malvinas (Falkland) islands, Gibraltar, Germany,
Belize, Canada, Diego Garcia, as well as 15,000 troops that are
still stationed in Northern Ireland.
The Strategic Defence Review (SDR), inaugurated under the incoming
Labour government in 1997 and delivered in 1998, called for a
military re-orientation away from the set-piece land battles of
Cold War strategic planning. Future wars would be fought with
rapidly assembled and highly mobile forces that could be called
upon to intervene in any area of the world. The SDR envisaged
that the UK's forces should be able to fight two medium-sized
wars at the same time, while engaging in a range of operations
from peacekeeping to "defence diplomacy" and drug enforcement.
These would generally be with NATO or other European forces.
To this end, the SDR called for new aircraft carriers, ferries,
helicopter squadrons, and transport aircraft to be built. The
management of the hitherto relatively separate army, navy and
air force would be merged. The part-time Territorial Army would
be strengthened. All this would be carried out within the rigorously
enforced £22 billion total departmental budget for the Ministry
of Defencea one-third reduction since the end of the Cold
War.
The fundamental changes the Labour government is pushing through
can be further seen in a White Paper, issued in December 1999.
This took forward the SDR and concretised the agreements made
after the December conference of EU leaders at Helsinki, where
Britain and France led calls for stronger European armed forces.
The White Paper notes that in the light of the events in the Balkans,
where European military weakness was exposed in comparison to
its American allies, Europe should be able to assemble a force
of between 50,000 and 60,000 troops "together with appropriate
air and naval elements". Intended as a force able to "tackle
the most demanding crisis-management tasks" and "militarily
self-sustaining for at least a year" this was not to be regarded
as a "European army."
Much of the White Paper, however, is devoted to the recruitment,
civilian support, and industrial buying necessary to sustain a
modern army. For years, even during periods of high unemployment,
the British military have been unable to either meet recruitment
targets or retain trained staffsuch is the popular hostility
to army life. The White Paper includes a range of marginal improvements
in conditions for military personnelallowing longer telephone
calls home when abroad, increased leave, better training, recognised
qualifications. More women will be recruited, homosexuality will
be tolerated, and even personnel sacked for being gay will be
asked to rejoin. One percent of new recruits is intended to be
via Labour's "New Deal" cheap labour programme.
Although not in the White Paper, the government also recently
announced that the army was having "exploratory talks"
with young offender's institutions with a mind to recruiting young
convicts. Labour also previously announced that 1,400 military
police would be released for combat duties and replaced by civilian
MoD police.
One hundred thousand civilian civil servants are also employed
by the military. An Action Plan is set out, essentially to introduce
the same cost cutting and efficiency measures already standard
practice in private industry and other state sectors.
Referring to the competition and duplication in the European
weapons industry, the government noted that they were "working
with the governments of France, Germany, Italy, Spain and Sweden
to develop a consistent approach to facilitate restructuring in
Europe." The OCCAR project ( Organisation Conjointe de
Cooperation en matiere d'Armaments) was, they hoped, a means
whereby "smart procurement"modern project management
techniquescould be introduced into the arms industry across
Europe. By this means, the UK government hopes to push forward
the integration of the European arms industry while defending
the position of the British sector. The UK is significantly in
advance of the rest of Europe both in military doctrine, and in
the introduction of "smart procurement."
The budgetary targets and stresses arising out of re-organisation
are the source of the immediate complaints emanating from the
military top brass. While there are no apparent strategic differences
between the government and the military chiefs, the military are
highlighting that they need more money to carry out the Labour
government's intentions. There are also disagreements over the
relaxation of the restriction on gays.
Responding to the leaked warnings of a military funds crisis,
Labour's chairman of the Defence Select Committee, Bruce George
MP, echoed calls for higher spending. "If the government
wishes to achieve its objectives then defence spending will have
to rise beyond the rather miserable level to which it has sunk
over the last 15 years," he said.
Confronted with criticism from the Tories, Defence Minister
Roger Spellar admitted the pressure on military budgets caused
by the Kosovo and East Timor operations and noted, "we are
in discussions with the Treasury on that." Robert Key, a
member of the Conservative shadow defence team, told BBC Radio
Four's Today programme: "This government has gone
on cutting nearly £1 billion a year from the defence budget
and this is really the problemit is not turning round."
The Liberal Democrat defence spokesman Menzies Campbell said that
the leaks showed that "you cannot get defence on the cheap".
The $35 billion (£22 billion) the UK already spends on
defence is the third highest in the world, after the US ($271
billion) and France. The armed forces directly employ 316,000
civilian and military personnel. This does not include the giant
UK arms industry, which is the world's second largest supplier
after the US and one of the UK's major employers, exporting around
£5 billion worth of arms a year.
The present UK military budget amounts to only 7 percent of
all state spending compared with 12 percent on education and 17
percent on health; 44 percent of the military budget goes on equipment.
The aim of the leaked reports is to warn the Labour government
that a shift in priorities is required if it is to meet its military
ambitions.
See Also:
Europe moves towards
independent military role
[5 June 1999]
Blair outlines his
vision of the new military world order
[29 April 1999]
$110 billion more
for Pentagon over six years
Clinton to propose biggest military spending boost since Reagan
[5 January 1999]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |