Afternoon:
10°c
There is something unsettling about the reports that General Sir Richard Dannatt is to become a mainstream Tory adviser on defence and security -just six weeks after stepping down as head of the Army. There is a broad assumption, too, that if the Conservatives win next May, the general will be give a peerage and become a minister.
The first question, and perhaps the last, is who benefits? I fear that even the general may come to regret such a hasty switch.
The first issue that Sir Richard Dannatt has to address is what the effect of his new role will have on his successor General Sir David Richards, the new head of the Army. At best it looks as if Dannatt will be doing a lot of second guessing about what his former comrades in arms now running the services may plan and decide. At worst it could undermine the commanders' authority.
Sir Richard's particular take can broadly be described as Army first. But now he is required to think strategically. What is coming up may not involve such heavy emphasis on land forces. Rising sea levels begin to pose serious risk to major ports. Protecting trade, and the supply of food and energy by sea means we must have a maritime strategy for the global threats posed by climate change. The arms race in intermediate missiles also means air forces will have to develop in a way that Sir Richard has scarcely recognised in his recent criticisms that too much is being spent on the RAF and Navy. Sir Richard shares with Oliver Cromwell a strong belief in his destiny guided by his faith.
Unfortunately he is a Roundhead playing now in the party of the postmodern Cavaliers under David Cameron. Cromwell's dictatorship fell asunder when he imposed the rule of the major-generals after he finally gave up on Parliament. Too many generals in power were a bad thing then, and I am not sure that even a few four-star generals and admirals raising their political standard and entering government is much better for us now.
