A minister has stated that the United Kingdom’s military stockpiles will always remain above the necessary level to ensure the nation’s security, despite the significant military assistance currently being provided to Ukraine.
Baroness Goldie, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, said during a debate in the House of Lords on the 26th of January 2023:
“In relation to replenishing stocks, the Ministry of Defence continually manages and reviews its stocks of weapons and munitions and these considerations inform what we give in kind to the armed forces of Ukraine. There are regular strategic supplier conversations throughout the ministry and we regularly fully engage with industry, allies and partners to ensure that all equipment and munitions granted in kind are replaced as expeditiously as possible. We are absolutely clear that we will never go below the safe line that we require for the security of our own nation.
A number of noble Lords asked specifically what we have been ordering. I can confirm that a number of substantial contracts have already been placed to directly replace our stockpiles. These include the replacement of the Starstreak high-velocity missile and the lightweight multirole missile. The next generation of light anti-tank weapons, NLAWs, are currently being built, and several hundred missiles will be delivered to UK stockpiles from 2023 onwards. A contract for further NLAWs was signed on 7 December 2022.”
Recent British supplies to Ukraine
The Tallinn Pledge was a joint statement by the defence ministers of Estonia, the United Kingdom, Poland, Latvia and Lithuania; and the representatives of Denmark, the Czech Republic, the Netherlands, and Slovakia. As part of this, the UK promised:
“The United Kingdom’s accelerated package consists of a squadron of Challenger 2 tanks (14 to be sent) with armoured recovery and repair vehicles; AS90 self-propelled 155mm guns, while preserving their commitment in Estonia; hundreds more armoured and protected vehicles; a manoeuvre support package, including minefield breaching and bridging capabilities; dozens more un-crewed aerial systems to support Ukrainian artillery; another 100,000 artillery rounds; hundreds more sophisticated missiles including GMLRS rockets, Starstreak air defence missiles, and medium range air defence missiles; 600 Brimstone anti-tank munitions; an equipment support package of spares to refurbish up to a hundred Ukrainian tanks and infantry fighting vehicles.
The package is further augmented by continuing basic training and junior leadership training for the AFU in the UK with 9 International partners. With the aim of training around a further 20 000 AFU personnel in 2023. The UK is also coordinating the International Fund for Ukraine which has raised almost £600M with partners. The first package of support from the fund will be announced shortly.”
The UK has already provided Ukraine with a significant amount of military aid, including over 10,000 anti-tank missiles, a manoeuvre support package with minefield breaching and bridging capabilities, nearly 200 armored vehicles, advanced air-to-air missiles, nearly 100,000 rounds of artillery ammunition, over 82,000 helmets and body armor, medical supplies, 25,000 sets of extreme cold weather clothing, 28 self-propelled guns, 36 artillery guns and ammunition, over 2,000 uncrewed aerial systems, 200,000 pieces of non-lethal aid, autonomous underwater minehunting vehicles, electronic warfare equipment, counter-drone capabilities, heavy lift UAV systems, 120 logistics vehicles, surface-to-air missiles, anti-aircraft guns and Sea King aircraft.
You can read the pledge here.
It’s very unlikely actual numbers will be told for most items. Still good to see replacements coming.
Funded from the Treasury reserve too I believe.
Yeah I read that somewhere also. As it should be really.
Yup – I recall £9 billion being allocated for this.
We needs details behind any figure, which we won’t get. The issue is it’s ione of them figures that is highly open to spin. For example existing funding for gear could easily be included. Same with releasing stock for the war reserves, could be considered at allocating funds to the active stock, without actually spending any money.
It’s £9bn from an Treasury emergencies fund, not the defence budget, to backfill existing U.K. stocks that have been given to Ukraine.
We will see when the MOD releases it’s accounts/purchase plans how that works in practice. Goverment accounting is less than transparent, making it easy to spin normal expenditure as emergency funding.
Oh I’m pretty sure if it turns out not to be the case both the Opposition and press will be eager to point it out – and civil-servants quick to leak.
Doubt it. They haven’t said when the money would be spent or over how many years etc. By the time it’s clear either way there will be more interesting topics in the media.
We, members of the public, should not be given details of numbers of kit ordered from industry and MoD should not have published such precise details of numbers of items supplied to Ukraine. Does no-one do OPSEC nowadays! It is up to HCDC and PAC to bear down on MoD and Treasury to keep them honest.
Can you explain that? We are the people paying for it, why on earth should we not know where our tax payer money goes?
National security rubbish is used to hide when they don’t want us to know where our money goes. If they are arming our armed forces properly what do they have to hide?
My explanation is national security and Ukrainian security. It is not rubbish. So far the Government and the Media has reported precise numbers of weapons and munitions supplied to Ukraine and the dates such items will arrive in-country – and the dates that training for Ukrainian personnel will start. That is a gift to Russian intelligence agencies. To take the example of tanks. We should not have revealed how many tanks were going to Ukraine and when, and also when we would train the Ukrainian crews. But it is perfectly acceptable for us to ‘shout from the roooftops’ about the… Read more »
I hear you, but to me so many of the issues our armed forces suffered in afgan/iraq, would have been avoided if info had been out there and the media had been about to challange the government. the MOD knew about the lack of basic supplies like body armor/radios/etc and about the weaknesses of the snatch landrover for years (as came out after the event) but kept it quiet hiding behind national secruity arguement. In reality it had the reverse impact, of weakning our secruity. In most cases you can almost guarantee any potential opponent would have the info, as… Read more »
I think it is up to the HCDC and the PAC and the Opposition Defence Minister (John Healey) to hold the MoD to account, not the media or the general public.
PMs just do what they think will get them voted in, which means the media needs to report on it to the voters. Same applies for goverment ministers and shadow ones. Just how a modern democracy works. The public isn’t interested in stuff that the media doesn’t make them interested in it, unless it directly impacts them.
There is also the problem that the MOD is run by people that have got to the top by being polictival and not rocking the boat, which means it’s in their interest to pretend things are better than reality.
Yes, sadly, thats all true. But maybe Ben Wallace is the exception – and hopefully General Sanders will be too.
You say accurate figures, but how can you be sure? Simplistically, why not give a date for the sending of a squadron of tanks, and then follow that up quietly with an additional squadron, in 2s and 3s. The UK has always been good at subterfuge. I hope the knack hasn’t gone.
I think the figures for the supply of western equiment and munitions is accurate as no informed commentator has ever challenged them.
The last time we deployed subterfuge might have been during the Suez campaign. I don’t think we are up to it now.
Could we just stop with that silly opsec thing. When the goddamn government is spewing all of what they’re giving away for a Sweet piece of public relations BS. It is a fair question to ask what the hell are we spending to replace it.
We? Its not we my little fanboy, your a US groupie so stop pretending to be from the UK.
‘WE’ are you pretending to be British now?
SAFE LINE? WHAT IS THAT SUPPOSED TO BE? WHATEVER IT IS, THE NAVY FELL BELOW IT IN THE LAST 5 YEARS OF THE 1980’S
I’m struck by the irony that many of the weapons which we’re procuring replacements for, have effectively succeeded in the task for which they were originally procured (albeit by proxy). In the case of NLAW, destroying numbers of Russian tanks and AFVs. Realistically this must have been their primary purpose; I guess potentially China also provides a threat but maybe less likely.
🤔 I wonder
Interesting. In Germany this is a very big issue. Fortunately, our new defense minister is finally taking steps to mitigate it. It is said that Germany needs 20 billion EUR to get ammunitions stockpiles to reasonable levels again.
So will that be an additional 20b On top of the €100b already promised? Or will it come out of that.
Defence companies are going to have a boost in trade for years to come.
Thanks Russia, you managed to achieve what defence analysts have been saying needed to happen for years.
This is where it really gets scandalous: Our (incompetent) old minister Lambrecht did NOT order ammunitions for the 100 billion package. In fact, NO budget has yet been assigned for the ammunition. In December, there was a crisis meeting in the Chancellor department (not the MOD!) where problems were identified. There are several problems: So far, almost no ammunition was ordered. On the other hand, the defence industry has not much capacity left in Germany, simply because so little was ordered. And then, some munition is not available currently due to obselescence. For example, some funds were allocated for a… Read more »
I’m really glad Germany seems to be going in the right direction politically. Defence had a very low priority for too long. Other countries had it low also.
Fingers crossed the new minister is great for defence.
A turn around can take time but I’m sure between German companies and any help needed from the rest of Europe it can get what it needs to be effective.
Yes the German minister of defence did seem to be totally incompetent. I think from a defence point of view at present the most important thing Germany can do is sort out its energy issues, digging itself into dependency on a state like Russia was a bit of a national embarrassment and has left Germany geopolitically weak against the only nation in Europe that was a risk to European peace.
On the energy side Germany is now investing so heavily into LNG and renewables that this has been reached already. Historically Germany was grateful that the Soviet Union accepted reunification (bear in mind Thatcher and France were not happy) and that the troops left 1994 (this is probably Kohls biggest legacy and succes) and I still believe that it was not wrong to seek good relations with russia in the 1990s and early 2000. The Problem arised that we did not want to see what Putin really was working for. With regards to Our Military- we have a historical guilt… Read more »
Given their recent refusals or feet dragging would you really buy a spanner from either a Swiss or German arms company ? Thank god we built Challenger 2 rather than buy either Leopards or Abrams,
Yeah buying Abrams would have been an absolute disaster…. That Challie is a wonder weapon. And UK is essentially lost the ability to build any sort of tank.
Yawn yawn yawn……..
The UK has lost the will to build a tank, not the capability. I’m pretty sure if we wanted to we would be able to pretty much build anything we wanted to, it just takes time and money.
My oh my got out of the wrong side of the bed today haven’t you nobber!
To think that the German economic powerhouse, the strongest economy within the EU, today has one of the weakest and most underfunded militaries on the continent is shocking.
Decades of cheap gas and other commodities from Russia is now taking revenge – kein Wirtschaftswunder mehr (no economic miracle anymore).
To put some perspective, however: Germany did send as much military aid as others. There are issues, but there is also a tendency to portray German military to be weaker than it really is due to political reasons.I would take those statements with a grain of salt. If you want funding, you have to claim you need it.
Not saying the state is good. It isn’t. But what is left is of good quality.
O/T But I live reasonably close to Middle Wallop (AAC base) and have noticed a very dramatic uptick in the number of AH-64Ds buzzing about. Lots of low level flying, diving down behind hills and night time training, far far more than I have ever seen in the 25 years I’ve been here.
I wonder if they’re training Ukrainian pilots on them to give away the surplus cabs as the AH-64Es come in
Crikey add a few more C2 and some warriors to the kit already promised you have a good old BAOR kit reunion.
I could be completely wrong, I’m just speculating. Just pointing out it’s a very dramatic and unprecedented (for me) uptick in activity, and the timing with the training of Ukrainians on top shelf British army assets seems to make sense
Also today the dutch sent 8 F35 to Poland. Something seems to be going on. In Germany the Training on the Marder has started. Leopard Training is on the way. I am Sure the same applies for Tanks.
Now this means we soon have artillery, Tanks, IFV. Attack helicopters are lacking in this equation.
We start to train UA on Chally on Monday.
uptick is because after waiting 2 years they have just got new ah-64e all the d’s are at wattisham i believe
Good idea, people have started pushing for fighters for Ukraine, but Apaches would certainly spoil the Russians day.
This probably training for the rotation to Eastern Europe.
There might be something in that,but i thought that the ‘D’s were being exchanged for ‘E’s,there was some debate as to the E model being a New build or a remanufactured D.
I did see a load of AH-64Ds playing escort to a bunch of CHF Merlin’s the other day. Also flying very low.
I think I’d always assumed that munitions had a shelf-life (chemical degradation of propellant, warhead, etc?), so shipping them to Ukraine was an alternative to scrapping/recycling/replacing older stocks in the normal course of events.
Anyone know?
That was probably the case for some munitions,NLAW’s in service date to delivery to Ukraine was thought to have been close to its expiry date.
True
It is very, very expensive to dispose of old ammunition stocks.
The usual solution it to do a lot of test firings!
The Ukrainians as mostly using old Soviet ammunition so they are not to put off by dates a few single digit years out of line.
So yes, this has aided stock rotation and also removing older variants from the inventory and replacing with the latest version.
So the reality is that it will be a slight upgrade and maybe even a cost saving on the disposals column!
Safe levels is entirely subjective and I’m sure the definition is highly in flux. If we had no ammo at all the mod could state it was in safe levels, if encouraged to do so, as not actually at war
Better yet, define the safe level as really high and we will never go below it… because we are already below it.
Hope all the Ukrainian kit is being paid for by the foreign aid budget.
Being a member of the a Royal Artillery I can tell you that we placed ourselves in a position in which we had no fuses for our shells for a significant period. This issue is still on going and the government are flat out lying about how much we have.
And what is this so-called ‘safe-line’. How will anyone know? We won’t of course, so have to trust those responsible for our defence. Given the drive to reduce taxes for the wealthy, which means reducing public expenditure do we have any confidence? Far from maintaining our defence expenditure at 2% t needs to radically increase and with urgent purchase of stocks of spares, weapons, and associated equipment. UK Governments have a history of doing things ‘just-in-time’ or even better late than never and in todays’s world there will be no time to ramp up production in cases of emergency. The… Read more »
Good post. Your last sentence and my ‘take’:
We certainly could not do Op Herrick again (a Bde Group operation with a strong National Support Element) unless 3 Cdo Bde was reconstituted as a deployable brigade and we had considerable recourse to the Army Reserve.
And that was just a ‘minor’ police action with no requirement for heavy armour and artillery against a non-peer foe!
Nick, Defeating Al-Qaeda and their Taliban backers was a ‘minor’ police action!? I must remember that one.