The activity on the Scottish Devolution front is ramping up, lots of news to digest on the political front but this, the Secretary of State for Defence weighed in with an uncharacteristically forthright response to Alex Sammond and the Scottish National Party.
The key themes for the SNP are easy enough to spell out - Scotlandwould not be a member of Nato and would be nuclear free. It would retain its army regiments, though the scale of any airforce or navy has yet to be detailed.
Its hard to see how Scotland would retain its Army regiments when the basic truth is they cannot recruit enough to fill them now, nothing at all to do with those nasty men in Whitehall disbanding historic regiments out of spite.
He said…
The UK armed forces are a highly integrated and very sophisticated fighting force. The idea that you can sort of break off a little bit, like a square on a chocolate bar and that would be the bit that went north of the Border, is frankly laughable.
On the Trident basing issue
You get them all or you get none of them. That is the simple logic with submarine bases. It would be an enormous exercise to rebuild the facilities that are at Faslane. It would cost billions of pounds and it would take many years. And obviously the cost of doing that would be factor that had to be taken into account in any reckoning on Scottish independence, if that is the way it goes
Trident is arguably one of the more serious subjects with Scottish devolution, the fluff about passports and banknotes is all very amusing but the nuclear deterrent is no laughing matter.
With reports that the MoD is actually making contingency plans for being politely asked to leave Scotland in the aftermath of full Scottish independence the scale of the problem must surely be prompting many to think about the cost. The replacement for Trident and the Vanguards was always going to be expensive, but a complete move of the fixed infrastructure is going to create significant additional costs and time delays to an already under pressure programme.
Its not as if we have a huge list of options either, from a force protection, space and manpower perspective the choices are limited. This is before any planning permission and tussling with the Greens and Lib Dems commences.
That said, its perhaps not a bad thing for this to be thrust into the public debate, the sheer cost of the system warrants discussion. Maybe the Liberal Democrats see devolution as a way of achieving their aim of nuclear disarmament.
The Scots can’t have their cake and eat and whilst I think we are stronger together, if independence is the will of the people, who is anyone to stop them, they just should not be expecting any favours.
maybe the new floating submarine service dock (recently commissioned) is for just this situation – just float the 50,000 tons to the new site.
With the submarine base located in the Faslane SBA, an independent Scotland will indeed be nuclear free.
Send them to our cousins in Virginia whilst Devonport is rebuilt. Offer the Scots half the MCMV’s as compensation.
there are hundreds of dead port towns in the uk.
Everyone of them would be gagging for the submarine base!
Mrs domj is from a little town called tywyn in wales, theres still an army barracks there but its empty, and it has the uk’s highest hills on the coast.
You might get some politicians kicking off, but put it to a referendum in any town in the uk and it’ll be a white wash, jobs trump nuclear.
For really off the wall answers, the falklands, western isles that dont join scotland or orkney/shetland that remain with the uk.
What about Barrow in Furness. The things get made there- also nice place to live – used to having service personnel. Good geology for storage bunkers in close proximity to town.
“Could Devolution Kill Trident”
Dunno about that, quite possible, but here is a much more relevant question:
“Could Devolution be the reason used to justify going to four Multi-role brigades?
Well, there was going to be a scottish brigade wasnt there….
‘but here is a much more relevant question:’
Really? I would think the former would have far higher importance.
5 points,
1) The missiles themselves sit in a common USN/RN pool.
2) The warheads are “made” in England.
3) There is Devonport as FT has pointed out.
4) FFS The Guardian as a reasoned defence source. Really?
5) FFS The Guardian as a reasoned defence source. Really?
Must agree with Topman.
But the second question is well-worded “used to justify”
- ie. it is going to happen in any case (and whether MRBs will be called MRBs is the third one, totally not significant as long they will be “fit for purpose”
- it is that “purpose” which seems to be the wexing and elusive question; partially helped by the now clearer definition of the two other bdes as being the key intervention force components
No Devolution has not (since it happened in 1999 killed Trident), but Independence could.
So pay attention at the back as some definitions are needed…
1. Devolution is what we have now. The threat to Trident renewal is only the political threat from all those people (including me) across the UK who think like for like replacement for Trident is a gross example of unnecessary willie waving of a scale that makes TD’s concerns about the risks and costs of CVF/JSF pale into insignificance and feel that something like Option 3 or 4 in RUSD paper from July 2010 might be more sensible. Follow this link http://www.rusi.org/downloads/assets/CASD.pdf
2. Greater devolution (or Devolution Max to some) probably has majority support in Scotland and might become Home Rule which would involve more responsibility/autonomy for Scotland (mainly involving having to raise the money we spend on services currently devolved) but where Scotland remains in the UK social and political union. This could be a Federal Union, but it does not have to be. The status of Catalonia in the constitution of Spain is a good comparison with the status of a Home Rule Scotland in the UK. A snag with this option is that the people of England have to care enough to agree to the re-negotation of the Union that it involves.
3. Dramatically different to either Devolution or Home rule is Independence which is where Scotland is a separate country like Ireland and therefore would be entitled to say what military forces are based on its territory. This is the SNP policy. Independence would mean the closure of Faslane for SSNs/SSBNs (and removal of Scotland from NATINADS as the SNP want us out of NATO too), but the SNP are perhaps only now realising that in any negotiations over splitting UK assets/liabilities with the RUK would be made harder by the fact that RUK is going to have to spend a fortune moving the Submarine Force to Milford.
Sorry to be pedantic, but devolution is not Independence.
Actually X, the Guardian does have some good writing on defence, as opposed to the Telegraph, Mail and Times.
I find the FT and the economist to be the best though
Thanks Mr G, good post
I think I was trying the say the natural end point of devolution, i.e. full independence but wanted a short pithy title
On the whole Trident issue I must admit to once thinking it was a red line over which we should never cross but the more I think about it, the more I think we need to seriously evaluate the issue.
I can see the attraction of not spending the money though
TD said “Actually X, the Guardian does have some good writing on defence, as opposed to the Telegraph, Mail and Times.
I find the FT and the economist to be the best though”
Personally I think they are all crap. But heck now we know what you do for a living we can filter out the staffroom Liebore-Lefty-bias can’t we?
eh, confused
@x ‘There is Devonport as FT has pointed out.’
Could devonport handle SSBNs and all the stuff on land that is needed?
As I’ve said before
Trident replacement simply isnt as expensive as the disarmament fruit loops claim.
The £100bn over 25 years includes things we have to do whether or not we replace trident, like cleaning up the sites where previous nuclear weapons were built, or where old submarines lay rusting.
A none CASD force has all the costs of a nuclear weapons program, with none of the utility.
Who would pay for cleaning up Coulport and Faslane
@dom j, i live in wales and can only say good luck with putting here! Plaid cymru would spit the dummy all over the place. With all this scotland independance, they are now pushing for an independant wales, yeah right!! I’m welsh and i live in wales and would never vote those clowns.
Remember it’s plaid that have tried to scupper/greatly reduce FJ training in valley.
I reckon a highly public survey of sites for a new base in places like liverpool which would welcome regeneration would certainly sway votes in the faslane area.
@ Topman
Well Devonport is Europe’s biggest naval base. And to humble me there appears to be a lot of space. I am sure something could be done for missile loading. As for warhead storage itself well that is a trickier issue but MoD does still own or has access to a lot of underground real estate in the south west of England.
@ Topman & AAC – “Really? I would think the former would have far higher importance.”
Important, sure. The deterrent is pretty fundamental, but its survival is largely a question of political will; we either have it or we don’t!
The MRB’s, the 82,000 regular force and how we get there, and the principle of the 4:1 harmony guidelines, are a conundrum, wrapped in riddle, and shrouded in mystery*.
If we are going to talk about the effect of an independent scotland then this seems a much more relevant question to ask, as the answer has so much potential to cast light on that mystery.
If independence comes HMF loses an airbase, a navy base, and a the scottish MRB, which begs the following questions:
1. can four MRB’s + two intervention brigades meet the stated ambitions of the SDSR?
2. if not, could they do so if we become a little more australian by changing to a 3:1 ratio for harmony buidelines over 32 months, rather than 30?
3. given #1 and #2, is this why there is so little detail on the exact process of transition, and end form, when we move from post-afghan to to FF2020?
4. I imagine the brigades, inc the scottish one, will still be using a lot of UOR’s by the time devolution happens, with all the valuable stuff evenly distributed 4:1 in favour of england, handy that, eh?
If independence comes, and i am sceptical**
* to utterly bastardise the original quote.
** there will be a binary question, but the “no” answer will come with the implicit promise of greater autonomy, and that will look attractive when contrasted against the brutal post-recessionary mess imposed by fiat across the water.
Dont forget as well, some of the units from Germany are Scotland bound, would have to rehouse them
TD
If Scotland goes Independant, Scotland.
If its on your soil its your problem.
PaulG
They might, but in areas they arent strong, they cant kick up a fuss, let alone win a referendum.
But that was just one example.
Bristol, Barnstaple, Plymouth, Exmouth, Poole, Southampton, Hull, Hartlepool, Newcastle, Barrow, Moreambe, Lancaster, Fleetwood, Preston, Liverpool any could be suitable with a bit of spending.
At least a dozen more sites in Wales, and Belfast or Portaferry both look possible.
Although keeping it in England would be sensible.
I’d have in a heartbeat, luckily i live in an ara where they don’t get a look in and many people cross the border to work, however 20 miles the other way is “taffia” country! They often write in to the daily post outraged about being “oppressed by the english” which normally turns out someone wrote to them in english! weirdos!!
Still as said in different thread wales( ok the UK) doing ok in military exports, faun trackway contracts with turkey and australia.
Your list is interesting i reckon they would the usual rent a crowd would turn up to protest, and would be quickly dispersed by the locals.
must read through before pressing send!
i’d have it in a heartbeat
luckily i live in an area
the usual rent a crowd
must go and recalibrate the sausage fingers
sausage fingers syndrome above, please excuse obvious typos!
@ x I just wonder how much that would all cost?
The crabs might lead the way on this. In some ways it doesn’t matter much where your subs are based, as long as they have access to open ocean. Whereas it does matter where your airbases are (unless you want to spend a fortune on tankers). If we lose Lossie then our ability to QRA the GIUK gap pretty much goes. And economically it is incredibly important to Moray, so the Nats wouldn’t want to lose it. So I can imagine some kind of Cyprus solution for Lossie, it becomes a Sovereign Base Area or just simply leased along the lines of Mildenhall.
Having established that principle, you could turn Faslane/Coulport into a SBA or similar – you could perhaps have it on a finite lease.
If the Nats don’t like it, we wait for a wind from the north and then set charges on the 3 SSNs and 4 Polaris boats currently rotting in Rosyth!
Just so long as they don’t do a Ukraine on us and sell a half-completed carrier to the Chinese to use as a “casino”.
@ admin – “Dont forget as well, some of the units from Germany are Scotland bound, would have to rehouse them”
I hadn’t considered that, how do you see it affecting decisions/outcomes?
TD ‘Actually X, the Guardian does have some good writing on defence’
This is the paper that thinks each CVF was going to carry 69 planes because it divided our previous total purchase numbers into two.
Oh yes, cutting edge stuff!
As said before, the FT is about the only decent mainstream paper for defence because they generally stick to facts.
As for the nuclear deterrent, it’s simple – if it is that much a national priority then new facilities get built.
‘I hadn’t considered that, how do you see it affecting decisions/outcomes?’ Personally speaking I think it will mean that should the day come they will have more troops than they need or want north of the border.
TD – Independence is not the logical end point of Devolution (or Home Rule for that matter). Such a solution has not meant Independence for Bravaria, Catalonia. Texas, Quebec, Isle of Man, Queensland or the Basque Country. Lots of countries have systems of sub state autonomy – relax!
am chilled now Mr G
@el sid, whilst reading an article a couple of weeks ago i became aware that durham airport was closing due to recession, although not as north as chilly jocko land in fast jet terms another 10-15 mins on reaction time, with todays modern radar not that much of a handicap.
Ironically the article states it used to be RAF durham airfield before being closed, used for freight because of it’s very long runway, get the project managers up there, the prospect of jobs alone will have the locals waiting with open arms!
just checked on google 75% of the airport is owned by peel and that’s up for sale, so not closing, but with a small number of civvy flights per day, could there still be a RAF base there? I know valley has civvy flights, would a shared runway lower costs?
AFMG
The Basque still blow up bits of Spain in their fight for Independance.
A new generation is growing up who point at a map and say “this is england”.
Devo Max could settle the issue, but theres no guarente its anything but a stepping stone.
It’ll certainly enflame English sentiments, something Salmond is very keen to do.
I would also point out that Qubec was conquered and won itself a good deal, and that Queensland *IS* independant, of the UK, in the Commonwealth of Australia.
The cost of Trident -and like replacements- can only grow, relative to a defence budget that will be chopped in proportion to the chopping up of the UK. So an independent Scotland could well kill it off.
Luckily, many of the thousands of jobs that will go will only belong to Scotts. It will also be interesting to see how the mighty Royal Scottish Navy can place enough orders to keep the ship building jobs after the QE carriers are completed.
Dominic J – calm the anglocentric world view. Queensland is part of the Commonwealth of Australia just as Texas is part of the USA, Quebec part of Canada, Basque Country and Catalonia part of the Kingdom of Spain, Bravaria is a Lander of Germany.
@ Topman – “Personally speaking I think it will mean that should the day come they will have more troops than they need or want north of the border.”
Well it may look that way on day zero, but given the prospects for ‘adventure’ available to Scotland’s nascent military I imagine HMF recruiters will have unlimited access to the cream of all those soldiers who march south on day two.
AFMG
I dont see your point.
Home rule in Australia led to independance.
Home rule in Texas does not.
Its hardly evidence once way or the other.
But since the SNP didnt stop at devolution, there seems to be no reason to believe they will stop at Devo-Max
@DominicJ
The Basque still blow up bits of Spain in their fight for Independance.
What, apart from the fact they’ve called a ceasefire a while ago? DominicJ strikes again on geopolitics. Even before that they’d hardly killed anyone for a few years, the Spanish police have been getting quite good at killing them and the equivalent of Sinn Fein had split with one faction calling for a peace process.
@TD The difference is that the likes of Texas aren’t committed to having a referendum in the next few years. A yes to full independence is certainly possible, you should never underestimate Salmond’s rabble-rousing skills and the trend is certainly in his favour. The latest polls are 33:53 for:against (up from 28:57 a few months ago) independence with 14% undecided, and with a majority in favour of devo-max if that question is asked.
Does get boring hearing time and again about those evil ‘London politicians’ always telling Scots what to do – as though there weren’t any Scottish MPs at Westminster. If that’s how they feel, SNP MPs should do what SF do – stay at home. Does also ignore the 13 years of a very Scottish Blair/Brown government.
Cameron is right to try and hurry a decision during the economic slump. Divide up the pot while the pot is empty, then cross fingers for South East England driven growth.
We should do what the Russians did (or mostly tried, when it came to aviation assets) when the USSR devolved/fell apart…get all the equipment and people on UK ground.
Sounds rather drastic, but that may be the case of what stays in ‘new lands’ stays there, or is barterd for payment (like the Ukraine does with the Russian Navys’ carrier training base, and when the Russians wanted their Tu-160′s back…)
I dont want the union tosplit, its reeks of looking at things through rose tinted specks.
There is a reason why those little ray of sun shines are based in the sparsely populate area of western scotland. Rather than the much more densely populated south west area.
I think trident shouldnt be replaced 20b is a lot and if that means the sub fleet going aip so be it. As its in the main equipment budget now in my view it needs to justify itself. Hard to ignore that neither germany, japan or south korea have these systems and are/have more major security threats than we did/do. A ABM defence capability possibly thru type 45 upgrade and retaining nuclear knowledge thru the civil power system would be my balance should the security situation deterioration a simple air dropped weapon could be conjured up as a holding option.
I think a recently parliamentary answer suggested we’re spending 4b in this parliament on that replacement.
And i think Scottish independence is a big mistake for all concerned.
el sid
why didnt you say they’d declared a cease fire!
I’m sure this one will entirely different than the last one, or the one before that, or before that.
Eta have declared half a dozen cease fires.
They never last
@ Topman re costs
Well £1600 x 5,000,0000 should cover it………
I can’t see joining a Scottish Defence Force as being too attractive a proposition for many in Scotland, particularly with a “disengaged” defence policy. I suspect also many currently serving Scotsmen would prefer to remain in the “English” forces. Many will have married non-Scots people and have built lives and careers south of the border. I think the Scots would struggle to maintain more than about 3 Battalions (currently 5), and a similar proportion of the other arms.
I can see the Scots asking for a squadron of Typhoon for QRA, some SAR helicopters, some smaller ships for offshore patrol work, some lighter Army vehicles and that’s about it. The rest is too expensive to maintain.
I can also see them asking for money for the annual rental on Faslane for about 20 years.
The Irish military has a good reputation because of its UN work. But there are still southern Irishmen who prefer to join the RIR.
During the early stages of the Irish debt crisis that £7billion bilateral loan showed how 90 years the Republic was still entangled economically with the UK. So just how quickly would the Scots, if ever, become truly independent?
@ James
The Scottish already have a small flotilla of OPV for fisheries protection. I suppose these would become the Scottish navy/coastguard.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_Fisheries_Protection_Agency
I can’t see why they would want a QRA capability.
James,
Did not Wee-Eek annouce he wished to go ‘Scandanavian’ recently (along with Chinese – :snigger: – high-speed trains)? Scotland with Combat-boats, Gripen and CV-90 makes sense. [Why have 1 Type-23/12 Tiffies/32 Callie-2s?]
As for the analogy of Texas: People should investigate ‘The Charter of Maine’! According to t’Economist, many-a-year-ago, upon separation from “bee-gee-land” – too late (on Friday) in Cloggyland to remember the indigenous spelling – the state has an enshrined right to rejoin The Crown. Add in a few of the east-coast Canuck provinces and I’d think that the Uk could be reborn (under an English parliament)…!
x:
Do you know what happened to the proposed Jura-2 class FPVs? What happened to the £90-million Westminster allocated. [I have seen articles previously but they have been 'removed'...!]
@James
The SNP wouldn’t have anything as complicated as Typhoons or Gripen, they’re aiming for something more like New Zealand. A self-defence force of lightly armed infantry, some patrol boats for fishery/oil protection, no NATO but Partnership for Peace. And that’s about it.
@DominicJ – just look at the graph I linked to. The modern ETA is a spent force, they’re under pressure militarily and politically. You said “The Basque still blow up bits of Spain ” and you’re simply not correct.
@Fluffy Thoughts – don’t snigger at Chinese HS trains. They’re building the equivalent of a high speed line from Lands End to John o’ Groats every 11 months, it’s just incredible. Meanwhile we’re stuck faffing about 140 miles of HS2 – or as the Chinese would put it, about 6 weeks-worth.