UK Defence – Are We Ready?

I joined the Royal Air Force in the final decade of the Cold War.  At that time, we lived under the omnipresent threat of war, with the UK Armed Forces postured in Germany to repel the Soviet hordes.  However, NATO prevailed, the dark clouds of imminent conflict dissipated, and the West breathed a collective sigh of relief.

The dawn of this new – and peaceful – era enabled NATO to reconfigure its military forces out of Germany and consolidate.  Where the UK had Divisions of soldiers, Squadrons of fighter jets, huge redundancy to cope with anticipated wartime losses, and vast stockpiles of weapons required to meet wartime utilisation rates, now political leaders could focus military spending elsewhere – the Peace Dividend.

The era since the fall of the Soviet Union also heralded the focus on Wars of Choice – Expeditionary in nature and against adversaries where western military capability dominated. Aircraft Carriers to enable Power Projection, troop-carrying helicopters to transport deployed forces, and smaller – more focused – land forces characterised the new military capability.  We were deployed to Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosovo, and a multitude of other international hot spots where the UK had “interests”.

The threat to the UK was considered low.

Where the UK had spent >4% GDP on defence pre-Cold War, now defence spending halved as domestic political priorities prevailed.  Duplication and redundancy were replaced with consolidation, stockpiles with “just in time” logistics, and defence focused on efficiency and cost-saving.

However, this era is now over.

Militarily, although the collective west had sacrificed Quantity for Quality, it continued to maintain its technological asymmetric military advantage.  Robust military capability is primarily designed to Deter any potential adversary – create doubt that the benefits of any aggression might be outweighed by the costs.  Despite a reduction in scale, the UK military has maintained a global reputation for professional and robust operational capability.

However, deterrence (conventional – for now!) is not just about capability – it is also about intent and resolve.  Over the past 3 decades, political appetite for military confrontation has been tempered by experiences in Iraq, Afghanistan and wider.  This waning political enthusiasm to confront potential adversaries has risked emboldening them, thus contributing to global instability.

By way of example, in 2013 in Syria, the US laid down an infamous red line to President Bashar Al Assad that if chemical weapons were used against the Syrian civilian population there would be consequences.   Chemical Weapons were used – hundreds of times – but the US threats proved vacuous;  western political credibility had been undermined.

And, following the fall of the Soviet Union, Ukraine became the 3rd largest nuclear power in the world due to the large number of USSR weapons deployed onto its territory.  Following extensive negotiations, Ukraine agreed to give up its nuclear arsenal in return for cast-iron security guarantees – guarantees backed by the USA, UK and Russia – captured in the Budapest Memo of 1994.  But only 2 decades later Russia illegally annexed Crimea, and then in 2022 Russia invaded Ukraine.  Despite the “cast iron” assurances previously provided, the West lacked the political resolve to translate political rhetoric into military action.

Little wonder that President Putin feels emboldened. And, when – not if – Iran and North Korea get nuclear weapons, Russia’s experience has demonstrated that the west has no appetite for confrontation with a nuclear power, even when such nations commit atrocities against other non-nuclear nations.

In truth, Russia has struggled militarily to impose itself in Ukraine. A major superpower with a vastly superior arsenal of weapons would have expected to vanquish Ukraine in months not years, and without the huge losses Russia has experienced.  For some analysts, this Russian weakness demonstrates the limited threat that Russia now poses to its European neighbours.

However, Russia now has a vast Army of battle-hardened troops that will form the foundations of a very powerful, credible and capable future military force.  Re-armed with modern tanks, artillery, missiles and equipment, Russia can be expected to capitalise on its growing relationship with Iran, North Korea and China to further embolden its global ambitions.

In this inter-connected world, Russia does not only have to pose a direct threat to our national borders to threaten our way of life or our interests.  Cyber attacks have increased exponentially.  Undersea cables and pipeline around the world are proving increasingly vulnerable, and Russia is already expanding its military influence into Africa to secure vital supplies of minerals, energy and metals that are vital components of our infrastructure and technology.

In sum, having served for most of my professional life in our nation’s armed forces, the current global environment feels significantly more dangerous and unpredictable than at any other point in my lifetime. It is unfortunate that the nation is also struggling with record levels of national debt, a NHS that is struggling to cope, and a wide variety of other demands on the limited resources available.

However, defence of our nation and its people remains the No 1 priority of any government – it is not discretionary.  Reconfiguring the nation’s armed forces to the new security paradigm – our national survival – will take time, and resources.  The strategy might place significant demands on the public purse – very likely at levels above those required during the Cold War (>4%).

BUT, this does not mean that government is devoid of choices.  This is not about simply throwing more cash at defence – it is about leveraging our nation’s industrial base, its innovators, Dual-Use Technology, networked simulation, and a raft of other initiatives to create a national defence eco-system – a Team UK approach.

More to follow – in the next instalment!

 

If you enjoyed this piece, click here to listen to Sean’s podcast ‘Red Matrix’. This is more than a podcast; it’s a forum for sharp debate, incisive analysis, and groundbreaking dialogue on the issues that matter most—geopolitics, defence, and the balance of global power. With an exceptional lineup of guests, In Defence will explore every facet of defence—from funding to Air, Land, Maritime, Space, Cyber, the nuclear deterrent and much more. Through the insights of veterans, academics, politicians, and industry experts, this channel promises to be challenging, informed, and sometimes provocative. Your engagement will shape the conversation.

Let us know if you—or your company – are keen to learn more.

Author

  • Sean Bell

    Sean Bell enjoyed a first career in the RAF where he flew Harrier fighter jets from land and sea and served on numerous staff appointments in the Ministry of Defence and overseas. Operational tours in Sarajevo, Bosnia, Iraq and 3 tours in Afghanistan provided a unique operational perspective. Sean left the RAF in late 2012 in the rank of Air Vice-Marshal. Since leaving the RAF Sean has a portfolio career which includes providing defence consultancy services to national and international clients, and running a niche property renovation company. Since 2022 Sean has been providing military analysis for SKY News (and other media outlets) and is a renowned speaker at related conferences. Sean is also the co-host and founder of the RedMatrix Podcast. Sean is also a Fellow of the IoD and the Royal Aeronautical Society, an Ambassador for RAFA, the Chairman of the Aviation Focus Group and the RAF Dinner Club, and is President or Chairman of a variety of charitable causes.

    View all posts