Morning:
9°c
A political row over defence spending intensified today as the Tories accused Labour of risking Britain's ability to go to war on its own.
Shadow defence secretary Liam Fox rejected one of the central planks of last week's Government green paper — that the UK will in future need to co-operate more closely with allies including France.
“We cannot accept the assumption in the green paper that Britain will always operate as part of an alliance,” he said. “We have unique national interests and have to maintain the capability to act unilaterally if required.”
The last time Britain went into battle alone was the 1982 Falklands War, when France was accused of sympathising with the Argentine enemy and selling them missiles.
In a speech to the Royal United Services Institute in London, Dr Fox claimed a Conservative government would ensure that Britain remained a “first division” military power. Labour MPs scorned his commitment, however, pointing out that the Conservatives were committed to deeper and faster spending cuts, which made military reductions unavoidable.
Last week's green paper set out the framework for a full strategic defence review which will be held after the election, whoever wins, and is bound to mean major cuts in manpower and large projects.
Dr Fox said the Tories were ready to wield the axe “ruthlessly” where appropriate and called for “long overdue radical thinking and reform”.
“It will be carried out ruthlessly and without sentiment,” he said. “Tough decisions will be made and there will be winners and losers at the end of the process but Britain will be safe and our interests secure.
“We are at a tipping point in Britain. We need to decide if we want to stay in the first division or slide into the second division. I choose the former.”
British forces in Afghanistan face a major test in coming weeks as part of a Nato-led push against Taliban forces in the dangerous southern region.
Operation Moshtarak, involving 4,000 troops, is aimed at clearing militants from areas surrounding the town of Marjah in Helmand province.
Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth has warned there is a “very real risk” of British casualties in the offensive but the hope is that elements of the Taliban will decide not to fight.
Instead of launching a surprise attack, Nato dropped leaflets over Marjah to give Taliban fighters a choice to lay down their weapons or face “overwhelming force”.
Minivans piled high with mattresses and clothing queued at checkpoints as hundreds of civilians fled. The militants, meanwhile, dug in for a fight, reinforcing their positions with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy weapons, according to witnesses.
Reader views (9)
C Nichol, London - in a straight choice between all or nothing, you choose nothing. That means you hope others will take care of you.
Socialist, are you?
- Rogan, Irving, 08/02/2010 19:44
Report abuse
Liam Fox's grasp of history is flawed. Britain was in no position to execute the Falkland operation without substancial assets of the US, the bases in Chile, etc.
It is difficult to think of a nation that would want to attack Britain, there needs to be an objective and prize, to expend military assets. britain has no empire, manufacturing base to speak of, a seriously flawed financial industry, limited reserves, an ever growing public debit liability. Only the theme park "Ye olde Britain."remains. Innovation/innovators leave as soon as it can for better prospects.
It's Military is used as the political fig leave for Washington, and NATO has proved a paper gravy train for Generals civil servant and politicians. The Chilcot Show, strips bare the notion that Britain is capable of thinking alone,let alone acting alone. Even the N deterant on UK Boats is controlled else where.
The greatest threat comes not in the form of Miltary hadware but from cyber space and non uniformed assymetric groups, thinking and working outside the box and from within in the form of idealist ignorant politicians, passing legislation that errodes the will for society to stand up and defend what is their birth right. Forcing people to think and operated within the box!
- Jock'S Away, victoria, 08/02/2010 17:13
Report abuse
European army anyone ? They will drahg us into Europe against our wishes
- Grim Reaper, Hell, 08/02/2010 17:10
Report abuse
What we need is modern equipment and highly trained professionals to provide an effective and cost efficient capability to defend this island from threats to our people from attacks by air, land, sea and cyberspace.
I would suggest that any state that has the capability and the will to launch a nuclear strike against the UK would not be deterred by a threat of retaliation, particularly if the person pressing the button thought they would be going to paradise, and were prepared to share that expectation with many of their fellow countrymen. Therefore what value Trident, other than providing temporary work for some in Barrow?
Similarly apart from providing temporary work for a number of employees at Rosyth, two new carriers with or without aircraft do not appear to provide much of a defence capability. I would suggest that this island provides a more than adequate unsinkable platform from which to launch aircraft/missiles and there is no requirement for a destroyer escort.
Of course, there may be some politicians who believe in the continuing existence of the British Empire, a perceived need to protect our global trade routes, and are desperate to sit at the top international table with countries that do have some clout.
When these misguided individuals realise that shaking hands with with Barack Obama or Hu Jintao doesn't make them world leaders, then perhaps they can start to concentrate on rebuilding this country.
- Peter, Aberdeen, 08/02/2010 16:17
Report abuse
Presumably Liam Fox would have us continue to pay for nuclear weapons so that a future government would "maintain the capability to act unilaterally if required.”
This won't ensure that Britain remains a “first division” military power.
It will instead make it like other third rate nations, such Iran, Pakistan and North Korea - like them, we'll continue to be led by corrupt politicians and have a disintegrating economy - but at least we'll have the ability to incinerate millions of people at the push of a button.
That sort of useless military hardware didn't impress the IRA or Argentina - and doesn't seem to scare off the Taliban either.
- C Nichol, London, 08/02/2010 13:56
Report abuse
Why?
Who are we planning to fight, other than Argentina?
- Gavin, London, 08/02/2010 11:51
Report abuse
Liam Fox is absolutely right. We all know that friends can let us down, whether it is because they have different viewpoints or different needs at the time; much the same with defence.
Furthermore, the training of the British military remains first class and their attitude is the same; we erode that or diminish it at our peril. We doubtless could learn a thing or two about defence from our European partners - but not much!
- Lester May, Camden Town, London, 08/02/2010 11:33
Report abuse
Dr Fox talks good sense. The UK is already in a military alliance called NATO, it doesn´t need further alliances to cushion dangerous defence cuts. It´s all very well depending on the French in times of military conflict, but what happens if they decide not to show up on the day? Britain must be able to stand on it´s own two feet, as well as being able to make a meaningful contribution towards any military alliance.
- Graham Rodhouse, Helmond, Netherlands, 08/02/2010 11:14
Report abuse
Gordon Brown & the government have been busy promising to 'ring-fence' this department's budget and 'ring-fence' that department's budget, whereas in truth, only two budgets should be held immune from cuts:
Education and defence.
The former is vital to ensure this country's future economy, the latter to ensure our safety and national interests.
Promising anything else is political grandstanding at the expense of our nation's future.
- John, London, 08/02/2010 10:59
Report abuse
