Minister for the Armed Forces, Luke Pollard, addressed attendees at the Global Air & Space Chiefs’ Conference 2024, highlighting the transformative role of air, space, and cyber capabilities in modern defence.
In his first speech as Minister, Pollard spoke about the critical importance of integrating air, land, sea, space, and cyber capabilities to address evolving global threats.
“Whether you are a member of the armed forces, an international ally, or a partner in industry, you will know that our air, land and sea naval capabilities are all dependent on our ability to work together in space, and in cyber,” he said.
Pollard discussed the necessity for the UK to adopt an “all domain warfare” approach, moving beyond multi-domain integration. “Where to win we control space, cyber, electronic spectrums, as well as air, land and sea in a single joined-up approach,” he explained.
Reflecting on recent achievements, Pollard praised the efforts of UK servicemen and women in various global operations, from protecting UK and NATO airspace to conducting precision strikes and thwarting cyber attacks. “It amounts to an impressive legacy from just 7 months’ work. And I want to thank everyone who has served for their professionalism,” he said.
Acknowledging the challenges ahead, Pollard pointed to the need for increased defence spending, improved procurement processes, and enhanced recruitment and retention of Armed Forces personnel. He highlighted the new government’s commitment to a Strategic Defence Review, led by former NATO Secretary General Lord Robertson, aimed at addressing these issues.
Pollard also reiterated the UK’s steadfast support for NATO and Ukraine, noting the government’s commitment to providing £3 billion annually in military aid to Ukraine until 2030. “Our commitment to NATO is unshakeable. We must, and we will fulfil all our obligations as a member and strengthen Britain’s leadership within the alliance,” he stated.
In conclusion, Pollard called for a collaborative approach to defence, urging contributions from forces, industry, academia, and international allies. “We will be a joined-up, ‘One Defence’ ministerial team, breaking down silos, and working to deliver a joined-up ‘one defence’ approach to the sector,” he said.
I suppose he could really cut out some of the 13 committees in MOD that would ensure some joined up thinking hopefully!
Imagine how much of an epic move it would be to attend the “Global Air & Space Chiefs’ Conference 2024” and just stand up to say “Gentlemen, the future of warfare is dismounted close combat infantry.” and then mike drop and walk out. 😂
🤣 I’d give my whole pension to see that!!!
Has set jitters off as pretty vague on GCAP apparently.
Not vague at all. Unlike AUKUS, GCAP is simply not protected and will be under review. During the next year, GCAP might be cancelled.
I’m not sure that’s big news as the government could ignore anything that comes out of the review and do anything at any time.
If we didn’t have Italy and Japan on board already, I would share your pessimism. With those 2 on board, I personally feel the project is decently secure, say 75-90% chance it results in a capability for us.
I didn’t mean to sound pessimistic. I agree, and like you I’m almost certain GCAP will survive the review. It’s not just the presence of Italy and Japan in the project. The emphasis on economic growth and prosperity makes GCAP a no brainer.
Indeed if we blow out Italy and especially Japan pretty much any potential benefit post Brexit will be thrown out the window, why would Japan want to partner with us on anything which in my view now that we have sidelined Europe and we have a potential clusterfuck of a future relationship with the US on the horizon is vital to any economic future. It would pretty much send warnings to the likes of Australia and India too no doubt about cooperation and who knows what damage it would do to prospects of keeping any remote commitment to Britain by the likes of Bae and RR who I suspect would turn to anyone but Britain for most future investment.
I agree
There was a Telegraph article about this, not sure it’s anything to take seriously yet though.
Either way,what would be the alternative ? ✈
This may not be appropriate to mention but maybe linking in with a US partner and their NGAD requirements?
Except I can see serious ructions and lack of trust between the next now almost inevitable US Govt and the Labour Govt now that it’s being compared to Islamic State by some Republicans. I can see a move to see if they can tie in with European efforts but don’t see that as a particularly profitable move knowing that the French will still want project leadership. It will be like Arianespace at best and be years late.
Not inappropriate at all, It’s a valid alternative as would joining the Franco German programme be but I firmly believe this programme will continue to fruition.
F35A. What I find interesting is that they can happily confirm AUKUS and Trident pre review but not GCAP.
I hope the speculation doing the rounds is wrong.
Maybe it’s just early days. The speculation doing the rounds has been fuelled by the press and I do get a sense of Tory weighted alarmism.
This Country needs to be at the leading edge of military technology and production, it’s good for employment and the economy but above all, it’s good for defence.
Yes, typical DT moaning yet they ignored a decade of Tory cuts when it suited.
I still wish they’d have confirmed it early like AUKUS.
To be honest I read the speech and I’m not to worried basically it could be summed up as:
1) GCAP is really important to the future of the RAF and UK airo industry and they fully support it.
2) they are having discussions with Italy and Japan on next steps
3) The process of the review will maximise capabilities available in the next 3 years, increasing the lethality and availability of stuff we have now.
4)They want the review to be armed forces and expert lead not politically lead and they are not going to force any programs by ministers committing to things outside the process..
5) timeframe for publication….this is looking like it’s going to be a very fast review and most importantly come up before the comprehensive spending review by the treasury, which is due at the end of next summer.
6) a pretty strong statement on identifying an opposing axis of china, Russia and Iran.
I honestly think the GCAP is safe as it’s unlikely the experts undertaking the review will not think developing a 6 generation fighter is fundamentally important..and there is no way Labour is going to do anything that kills military industrial complex jobs.
What really interests me is the statements about the review not being politically lead. Thats just a very interesting statement to make…I think we are seeing a bit more that Starmer is far more of a technocratic politician who leans to social democratic tendencies than a socialist politician.
I also like the focus on three years and the strong statements on who the enemy are and the fact they are aligned.
I suspect we may see a bit of a focus on preserving and upgrading present equipment quickly…as well as bring capabilities in the near term…I think we may see a shift from jam tomorrow to how is the Uk fighting a war now.
to be honest the bits I really wanted to see…the defence review being done before the compressive spending review and a focus on deterrence now and improving capabilities to fighting on the timescale we know China is working to ( 2027-2030).
Im feeling a bit positive..but we shall see in the spring…..
As always, the voice of reason!
Thanks J, you are my medicine against the endless pessimism and worry!
Absolutely.
Wild speculation from the press should not be taken seriously.
Not sure how we would look on the world stage if this were the case with our international partners. It’s not like we do have previous for this.
Agreed, it would pretty much confirm our road to being a third World economic power, something I produced a little satirical cartoon about as a student in the 80s but like President Trump in the Simpsons is eerily looking too close for comfort. Lateral thinking amongst politicians is never a quality that should be presumed sacrosanct.
I read through his speech and to be honest I thought it was pretty positive and had a couple of the key things I wanted to hear.
you can break down what he said to:
1) GCAP is really important to the future of the RAF and UK airo industry and they fully support it.
2) they are having discussions with Italy and Japan on next steps
3) The process of the review will maximise capabilities available in the next 3 years, increasing the lethality and availability of stuff we have now.
4)They want the review to be armed forces and expert lead not politically lead and they are not going to force any programs by ministers committing to things outside the process..
5) timeframe for publication….this is looking like it’s going to be a very fast review and most importantly come up before the comprehensive spending review by the treasury, which is due at the end of next summer.
6) a pretty strong statement on identifying an opposing axis of china, Russia and Iran.
the fundamental bit for me was that the review is not looking like a political exercise in cost cutting and cover for a political agenda..but a real review..it also looks very much like it’s going to be published before the treasury comprehensive spending review ( which will set strategic spending plans for the next 3-4 years) as that’s not due until the late summer…if they were focusing this as a treasury lead savings review ( as per all of them since 1997/98) we would see the spending review first.
Its also looking like it’s going to focus on the geopolitical and geostrategic struggles over the next 3 years..with named opponents, Russia, china and Iran..recognising that they are now working together…maximising what we have already and can get quickly…
We may see some interesting things… and I’m wondering if the tranche 1 typhoons will be sticking around until there is an active replacement..more tranche 2-3s having sensor upgrades…using the sensors we have purchased to build more AEW aircraft, upgrading more challengers…maybe even a warrior upgraded…..lots of very good kit that never really needed replacement, just a good upgrade program.