The Royal British Legion has recently launched a campaign to support ex-service personnel. My grandfather is a long-serving member of the British Legion, having seen action in a Bomber crew in World War II. Like many, he lost family and friends in that terrible conflict and hence, I have always had personal reasons for supporting the Legion. Their present campaign, however, appears to have been launched in response to the recent increased demands placed upon British Armed Forces.
At present, Britain has significant forces in Afghanistan, Iraq and Northern Ireland, as well as smaller commitments elsewhere. David Cameron is presently in the province of Helmand in Afghanistan. He is there to rightly show the Conservative Opposition’s full backing for that on-going campaign to support the democratically-elected government in Kabul, and to wage war on al-Qeeda forces based on the Pakistani border. He is also there to highlight the importance of proper government funding for our Armed Forces.
According to a recent Commons Public Accounts Committee report, there is presently an overall shortfall of Armed Forces personnel of 5,850 (3.2 per cent of full strength). Shockingly, military recruitment drives have been cut back by pressure to downsize or reduce funding. The report cited an example of the Army cancelling some infantry training courses during 2004-05, and consequently deferring recruits, in order to stay within budget constraints. During the past decade, the Government has cut the strength of the Royal Navy and Royal Fleet Auxiliary from 142 to 110 ships. The frigate and destroyer fleet has been dramatically reduced from 35 to 25. Furthermore, the Government has withdrawn the Royal Navy’s Sea Harriers from service in early 2006, despite its replacement, the Joint Strike Fighter, not being expected in service until 2014. These are hardly the actions of a government that places proper funding of the Armed Forces as a top priority. Indeed, it hardly augurs well for the defence of the Realm.
The British Legion is right to highlight that the government has broken a covenant that I believe all Britons believe in: if British service personnel are asked to put their lives at risk they should not only expect proper equipment in the field but also proper care when they come home. It is a sad indictment of government policy that a charitable organisation has felt the need to highlight short-comings in the care of ex-servicemen and women.
The original decision by the Labour government to commit forces to support the NATO-led operation in Afghanistan was the right one. Where they have been found wanting, however, is in the proper support of our Armed Forces since then. I have written previously on the need for the British government to properly fund the army, navy and airforce, if it is to continue actively engaging them in global conflicts. When is our new Prime Minister going to authorise increased defence expenditure? It is easy to talk tough in the US about intervening in Darfur etc… It appears much harder for him to commit government funds to pay for commitment. The sooner Mr Brown’s ‘honeymooning’ is over the better off our armed personnel will be. The Nation’s covenant with the Armed Forces deserves much more respect.
August 7th, 2007 - 12:43 pm
Want to support our troops? Then try not sending them to fight battles they can’t win! ‘Shameful’ not ‘special’.
March 3rd, 2011 - 11:32 pm
Eileen – have you ever worn uniform and served in an active zone? Perhaps you attained high rank and received strategic training?
I suspect your comment comes from emotive reasoning rather than logical thought, however, to some extent I agree that the fight in Afghanistan may not be one that can be won.
The British army has been defeated in Afghanistan before, admittedly a long time ago, when they were less technologically advanced and dependant compared to today, and when the technology and supply imbalance was less profound than today.
Yet, it was only 32 years ago that the Russians moved many army Corps, including armour, into Afghanistan, and continued getting whipped by the “peasants in the hills” before having to finally pull back to the motherland.
To continue what is happening over there, the British and the American governments would do well to remember the words of General Schwartzkopf in Gulf War One – “We will use irresistible, unstoppable, and overwhelming force …” – the emphasis on the last adjective of the three.
If the free world allies want to finally crush and destroy Al-Qaeda, then they have to stop pussy footing around, and go for it without any hindrance from government or funding. In terrain like Afghanistan, technology can only achieve so much, in the end, it comes down to feet on the ground, and Labour’s funding cuts hamstrung the army when they needed manpower … but can the UK afford to pay the bill nowadays anyway?