The Ministry of Defence has confirmed that the British Army is still pursuing its goal to double its lethality by 2027 and triple it by 2030, as outlined by the Chief of the General Staff earlier this year, according to a recent parliamentary response.
In response to Conservative MP Mark Francois’s inquiry about whether these targets remain on track, Defence Minister Luke Pollard stated that “the Chief of the General Staff is working hard to fulfil the ambition outlined at the RUSI Land Warfare conference.”
Pollard added, “The British Army continues to work to these goals, in tandem with the ongoing Strategic Defence Review.”
Key questions remain around the feasibility and specific steps required to achieve these milestones. The ongoing Strategic Defence Review may provide further clarity on how these objectives will be met and the resources allocated to this effort.
The urgency of these goals stems from statements made by General Sir Roly Walker, Chief of the General Staff, who in July described the pressing need for the British Army to be ready for a potential conflict by 2027.
Walker characterised the current global environment as an “axis of upheaval” marked by intensifying threats from Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea. Citing growing support between these nations, Walker emphasised the importance of rapid modernisation to keep pace with adversaries who are increasingly interconnected and mutually supportive in their military ambitions.
Walker’s comments highlighted the challenge posed by China’s ambitions regarding Taiwan, Iran’s nuclear programme, and Russia’s continued aggression in Ukraine, all of which contribute to a volatile security landscape. He noted U.S. assessments indicating China’s potential readiness for action over Taiwan by 2027, adding a sense of urgency to the British Army’s plans for enhanced lethality.
To meet these heightened demands without significant additional funding, Walker suggested that the British Army must adopt innovations in technology, including drones and artificial intelligence, drawing lessons from the conflict in Ukraine.
Is the domain of the British Military too wide? Should it be doing Crime, Cyber, Intel…
Why aren’t those functions broken up into smaller specialised units?
Not one big company! That’s just plain stupid!
👏
No.
Crime. As in, it has a Corps of RMP?
Cyber is tri service as well as the agencies.
Intell is vital.
? They are.
Surely mass counts in an Army!!!
I’m a proud ex serviceman and it upsets me greatly to see our once capable Armed Forces decimated by successive governments. We are merely a Defence Force albeit a small capable force with a punch – we remain a warrior nation, but if we continue the decline then I’m not sure what will be left.
I’m really not sure what our American friends and fellow warriors think anymore.
Mass counts for very little in mechanised warfare, logistic, training, technology are far more important.
Juts ask the Iraqi army
I’m sure you probably not aware but you do realise that while we are raising our defence budget in real terms the US is cutting theirs right?
It’s self hating nhailist comments like this that make alot of people want to stop visiting this website.
It’s also food for Russian Trolls and Chinese propaganda.
If your going to make comments about how shit the UK is then can you atleast do your homework.
I’m encouraged by this news and in the face of mounting threats it’s heartening that the Government is making this commitment.
Hmmmm. According to Wallace in the DT today, that nice little 2.9 billion boost to MoD the other week INCLUDED Ukraine money.
So not quite as it seems?
It’s something I thought was likely. Never trust a Governmental politician, such as Reeves.
I was interested to read him saying never believe the statement in the Commons, look for details in the “Red Book” where all the gory details reside.
Reeves doesn’t give a toss apparently. 🙁
What on earth made you think otherwise?
Blind hope?! I’d trust Labour on defence, as I’ve said many times, as much as I’d trust Pol Pot.
But the last Tory government was so bad as well. Nowhere to go.
Blind Hope…Yep I know exactly what you mean considering the last 15 years or so.
That’s ridiculous, very disappointing indeed.
Surely you’re not trying to compare our defense budget to that of America as that would be really amusing.
As for the comment about people no longer wanting to visit this site I’m sure there are more pertinent posts than someone merely bemoaning the state of our armed forces.
The trite comments about ‘doubling and trebling our lethality’ whilst having no credible plan to increase man power deserves to be called out for the bullshit it undoubtedly is.
Double, umm did i miss some thing? Head of the Army say triple are the MOD already down playing that?
No, CGS originally said to double by 2027 and triple by 2030.
sadly its not the military that needs reducing, but the politicians that need to be replaced.
just a thought.
Replaced with who?
anyone other than what we have, perhaps.
any suggestions?
Proposer autocratic leaders who will spend massive amounts of public money on the army that we might have grand military parades each year 😀
I don’t understand. Double it from what to what? What are we doubling it and trebling it from in the first place? What exactly are we doubling and trebling that’s included in the term lethality?When was the start date that they decided to double it and what did we have then? My brain hurts.
I suggest.
ISTAR. ISTAR. More ISTAR.
Linked to the Deep Fires expansion, C UAS initiatives, Boxer Overwatch, and the AD expansion, both SHORAD MRAD, that they are still to implement.
On that, I think they were holding out for more personnel in the SDSR, but as that’s now not happening it takes some planning, moving establishments about, creating new Batteries in the RA while reducing other areas.
It also needs a greater stockpile of ordnance.
Indeed , it will be interesting to see what metrics they use to measure the ‘before’ and ‘after’ appraisals…
If we look at what is responsible for most equipment losses in Ukraine, then narrow our search down to just things that fall under the Army’s remit, we quickly find ourselves presented with just 3 systems that seem to have an outsized impact on lethality. Drones, Self Propelled Guns, and Multiple Lauch Rocket Systems. Therefore, if we give every section a First Person View drone, and double our SPG and MRLS numbers (whilst also making sure we have sufficient ISTAR capability to take advantage of these new and shiny toys) then we can pretty credibly say we have doubled if… Read more »
Nice to see the army finally focus on effect rather than input.
“lethality” Targets shmargets… what a load of old pony! The only way to ‘double’ or whatever how lethal an army is, is to have more of it. With less than 73,000 (with god alone knows how many are queuing up to leave) in the Army, and 9,000 or less Infantry, what world are these people living in!
Those numbers are for sure an issue, tech can only get you so far raw numbers are also essential. It was only a few years ago that they were aiming for the ability to deploy 50k troops, guessing that is now sub 30k or 20.
We await what this means in reality.
More precision fires.
More GMLRS.
More AD
More ISTAR linking it together.
Knowledge is power.
Only issue is you still need bodies and greater mass then we now posess, and firepower.
If the army ever actually announce how they intend to do this it’ll he good.
stormtrooper clones I believe…
What does “double lethality” mean? Double the number of troops or equipment, bullets?