“I have fought and bled alongside them…and I have a duty to stand alongside them.”
Events in Eastern Europe call the assumptions of the Government’s new defence posture into question. Can we defend our treaty allies?
Even if a large conventional military suited Britain’s needs, the public is not prepared to pay for one.
Starmer attacked Johnson for promising not to cut the size of the Army, yet now doing exactly that.
The review was described as ‘the most comprehensive Review since the Cold War’. For those with memories of previous reviews, this probably caused hearts to sink a tad.
The impulse of Brexit is to prove Britain’s openness by striking out, but this tilt increases our security dependence on Europe.
And if that projection is to be effective, we will need to invest in our operating bases – and not just at traditional sites.
Reports that the former brought pressure to bear on ITV are alarming. Can we look forward to a new series – Britain’s Got Feudalism?
The Defence Secretary has done the right thing by extending support to those no longer serving, but that needs to be followed with action.
Doing more to incentivise recruitment is not only good for the Armed Forces, but benefits the rest of society too.
The success in procurement and distribution prompts the question of what else we are outstandingly good at.
The Government should engage local authorities and the 10,000 military personnel held at high readiness to provide increased resilience.
Here is a politician educated at Sandhurst and on active service with the Scots Guards in Northern Ireland, not by reading PPE at Oxford.
The only institutions I can think of that retain the term ‘British’ are the BBC and the British Army – and, in Scotland, its Twitter handle is @ArmyScotland.
Spending amounts to an extra £24 billion over four years from today’s levels, helping to equip our Armed Forces.