Reported in the Telegraph, the Guardian, Sky News and the BBC early this morning was a series of statements from Liam Fox MP, shadow Secretary of Defence. Given that most commentators feel that a Conservative win at the next election is likely anything that Liam Fox says on the defence issues is always newsworthy.
In previous blog posts here and here I have looked behind some of the statements from Liam Fox and found the facts at odds with the rhetoric. The UK desperately needs an effective Secretary of State for Defence, one who can drive through effective reform and ensure that funding meets aspirations.
Liam Fox said it was no longer possible to expect a fifth of the Army to be permanently tied up in continental Europe when such huge demands were being placed on the military by tighter budgets and the war in Afghanistan but would be contingent on agreement from allies and suitable accommodation being available in the UK.
A phased drawdown from Germany has long been an objective of UK Defence Policy, recently Project Borona relocated the NATO Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC) headquarters and other units have also been relocated to the UK. 4 Mechanised Brigade have also relocated from Germany to the UK and they are part of 1 Armoured Division.
Medium to long term plans include some consolidation of estate in Germany.
There might be some economic benefit to the wider UK economy, the supporting businesses are reportedly generating several billion Euros for the German economy and all things being equal this should be for the UK economy.
Strictly speaking, Liam Fox is correct, there is no military need to maintain forces in Germany to meet the Red Army streaming through Poland and Germany but in 2009 there are many other practical military reasons to do so.
The large training facilities available to 1 Armoured Division are second only to BATUS in Canada. There is simply not the space in the UK for large scale armoured warfare training. These training areas would still be available for UK armoured forces if they were relocated to the UK but it would be a significant and expensive exercise to deploy to the training area, there is nothing like having massive training areas on your doorstep.
The Defence Estate in the UK is under considerable pressure anyway and the accommodation issue is a big one, where would these people go, how much would the move cost and what about all the accommodation in Germany?
As a counter argument, heavy armour is less likely to be used in the future and in a future defence review is likely to cut numbers. British Forces Germany need a lot of Liam Fox’s favourite people, MoD Civil Servants.
Being in Germany has absolutely no bearing on deployability whatsoever.
As usual, there are many arguments and counter arguments.
But for a marginal or non-existent military advantage Liam Fox would relocate UK Forces Germany to the UK, thus costing a fortune and depriving the UK of invaluable and easily accessible training areas.
Time is getting short for Liam Fox to start generating some credible defence policies instead of generating meaningless soundbites. I hope there is more to the Conservatives defence and security agenda that this.
EDITED
I have added one or two extra items, taking a lift directly from the comments, thanks gents.
“There is simply not the space in the UK for large scale armoured warfare training.” – This statement highlights one of the fundemental problems with our military doctrine in that we still believe it is necessary to have large formations of Challenger 2′s. Given that modern warfare demands rapid deployment, and Challenger 2′s can only be deployed globally by sea, is it not now time to accept the obsolescence of these battlefield behemoths? The cost of this kit, plus the fuel and logistical support required to keep them operational could be better spent on aircraft, artillery and air-portable armoured vehicles.
In many ways I would support removing UK forces from Germany but being practical it would cost quite a bit of money although that could be balanced by the Job Creation and economic benefits in the UK. To accommodate 20,000 troops and a huge number of dependants there would need to be a pretty massive construction program in the UK to house all the people and their equipment and where would this be built. A location would need to be found close to Salisbury Plain but I would argue also close to a port to allow mobilisation from the UK. I’m not sure about the size of the training areas as doing a quick Google shows that Salisbury plain is actually larger than the Bergen-Hohne training Area in Germany although only some of Salisbury Plain is strictly off limits to the public. I would hazard a guess that if they were brought home they would no doubt be based at ex-RAF airfields somewhere convenient.
There is technically no need to be in Germany the main reason we are still there is because it would cost money to move all the personnel and equipment back home and pay for all the construction work. If it isn’t a problem don’t try and fix it, The Germans are more than happy to have us there as we don’t cause trouble and pump billions of Euro’s into the economy although who knows what will happen in future. All the money that would be used to bring everybody ‘home’ could either be saved or spent elsewhere in a very tight defence budget. A good idea would be to improve the accommodation in the UK and maybe lay the infrastructure if we needed to move out of Germany but I would think that chances of that happening are pretty low unless we ditched the EU and gave them the cold shoulder. I think politically in the eyes of the public it might work as the economic benefits alone should be a big draw to communities wanting a massive Army base nearby there is also the feeling of support for the Army as well as tolerance which was lacking before Afghanistan. So while it may be stupid in many ways, politically I think it could happen as there would be support from the public and support from MP’s wanting the economic boost.
In a wider political view I think there needs to be massive sustained spending on every aspect of the UK’s infrastructure from power to water from trains to ships everything really needs brought into the 21st century. When you look to other nations we are far behind in many areas because all of the record public spending has been spent on essentially non-lasting socialist projects.
Richard I support the argument that tanks are in many respects far out of date but sometimes you just need the protection that a tank can give although armour technology advances so does weapon technology so lighter vehicles are still far more vulnerable. I think the Majority of the army armoured forces should be based on something like the Tracked BAE SEP which is light enough to be transported via C-130 and can be up-armoured with modules as well as having some support benefits. I deplore wheeled armoured vehicles as they have mobility problems when they need to go anywhere but on a road and the last time I checked roads usually get watched or bombed in war. Furthermore if you add extra armour things like tire inflation systems need changed which is not easy as the US Stryker brigades found out.
Richard: ““There is simply not the space in the UK for large scale armoured warfare training.” – This statement highlights one of the fundemental problems with our military doctrine in that we still believe it is necessary to have large formations of Challenger 2’s.” – LOL what large formations of Challenger 2′s, going on how many armoured regiments we have, most of the Challengers built must be in garages somewhere, unless we now have more than 57 per regiment. Modern armoured vehicles have simulators which are just as advanced as fighter aircraft, but I guess driving your tanks around a field or three is much more realistic.
Liam Fox appears to be just another disaster in waiting and his “sound bites” appear to be just that. Withdrawing from Germany would cost billions and you have all commented on many of the other potential issues. The Conservatives if they get in, are not going to be the glorious saviors of the UK armed forces, just remember all the tory defence ministers who have imposed stupid cuts in the past.
Sensible or not, BAFG will come home, its an easy political win, usable to beat Labour, “you deployed more men to fight the Soviet Union than the Taliban” and, although I hold few hopes in this regard, the EU, “you refused to help us in Afghanistan, defend your own fidula gap”.
As for Tanks.
The chances of 400 Challenger2′s storming across the plains hitting a Russian tank guards army are pretty minor.
Its pointless now, our Apache fleet does it better, squad of 4 aircraft carries 16 hellfires each, 64 possible kills, from the fluff, 64 probables
Dont we have 12 squadrons flyable at any one time?
Thats 700 tanks…
Large scale tank on tank warfare has been relegated to lower tier powers, it could happen India/Pakistan or India/China, or China/Russia, Russia/Ukraine, probably a couple of South Americans going at it would scrounge together enough tanks for a tank war.
That said, since any national expeditionary capacity we maintain will have to be sea based, a couple of dozen tanks would be something nice to throw into the mix.
The rest, keep them as “militia” assets.
I think Dominic made the point better they will at some point come home no matter how stupid it may be as it is a political stick that can be used to bash the Labour Government for their failings. Dominic I’m guessing you’re not a huge fan of the EU well I’m not either if to be honest, Good relations are fine so is good trade but we signed up for a trade block not for the United Socialist States of Europe. On the political side of things if the Tories win the next election we could see the Eurosceptic side re-appear and push for change from within the party. They might make some headway depending on what is happening at the time within the UK/Europe and how it affects the public mood.
The defence issues of the UK are obviously what this blog is about and Jed is correct the Conservatives and Liam Fox are most likely going to do a mediocre job just like everyone who has come before. This in part has to do with the people the voters who simply don’t care about what happens to the military it doesn’t affect who they will vote for as it generally does not affect their lives immediately. Even some of us I doubt would have military concerns at the top or near the top of our list of things we would like to see changed, it may be much higher than the majority of people. I would happily have a small military if we had energy security, food security and were very independent economically in regards to things we need to live but we are far from it hence why we need a larger military and need to be active on the world stage.
Yes this comment went very political but that after all is one of the big issues.
There is no doubt that BFG is a throwback to the cold war and costs a fortune to maintain. Of course it will have to come home but for Liam Fox to say that he wants to accelerate it at a time when resources will be so scarce and to ‘improve deployability is just ridiculous.
Just to throw another option into the mix, you could also remove BAFG from Germany by disolving it.
Does the UK need a 20,000 strong Armoured Division?
In Germany or Salisbury?
Thats half a billion pounds just in payroll costs.
Would going from 100,000 to 80,000 soldiers in the army but removing the BAFG requirement change the chance of being deployed to Afghanistan much?
I wouldnt have thought so.
Average Yearly Recruitment is 25,000, couple of bad years and thats sorted…