The paper highlights disinformation around attacks on 5G phone masts and a land war on the European continent and argues NATO must do more against hybrid and conventional threats.

The paper, created by the SNP Westminster Defence Team has been released ahead of NATO leaders meeting in Madrid next week to discuss the new ‘NATO Strategic Concept’, replacing the one that has broadly guided the Alliance since 2010. The Strategic Concept is a key document for the Alliance. It reaffirms NATO’s values and purpose, and provides a collective assessment of the security for the decade ahead.

One of the recommendations from the paper titled ‘Strong States, Resilient Societies and a Renewed International system‘ is that NATO must do more to build resilience to so-called ‘hybrid threats’ such as cyber attacks and disinformation within societies.

Additionally, the paper calls for NATO to pursue the closest possible relationship with the European Union as two unique organisations with shared values and interests in the Euro-Atlantic area.

The paper also argues for increased conventional defence investment. Pointing out that in November 2021, the UK Prime Minister stated that Allies “have to recognise that the  old concepts of fighting big tank battles on European land mass are over, and there are  other, better things we should be investing in, in FCAS, in the future combat air system, in cyber, this is how warfare in the future is going to be.”

The paper goes on to add that “these words reflected UK Government policy, which shrunk the UK Armed Forces to their smallest size since the  1701 War of the Spanish Succession while investing more funding into the development and purchase of emerging military technology. While recognising the continued need to invest in maintaining technological superiority, the return of land war to the European continent should banish the illusion that future conflicts will be fought primarily in cyberspace or with autonomous weapons: an armoured capability must be a necessary element of any equipment plan designed to defend Europe”.

The paper recommends that “the next decade must see an end to the era of cuts to the Armed Forces, both in terms of funding and personnel numbers”.

SNP Defence spokesperson Stewart McDonald MP said:

“As NATO Allies meet in Madrid to agree their strategy for the next decade, the UK Government has an opportunity to turn the page on its troubled relationship with international law and our European neighbours. The moment demands no less.

NATO and the EU are the twin guarantors of Euro-Atlantic security order. It is long past time the UK Government recognises this, brings an end to its petty avoidance of our European neighbours and signs a comprehensive defence and security agreement with the EU.

As a party that wishes to see Scotland succeed as an independent member of the international community in NATO and the EU, it is vital that we are active participants in the ongoing debate about Euro-Atlantic security. These recommendations are made in a genuine spirit of wanting to see strengthened states, societies and systems to best protect all those living under the alliance, including those here in Scotland where support for NATO is in excess of 70 per cent.”

Read the SNP’s recommendations for the NATO Strategic Concept here.

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

118 COMMENTS

  1. Well, the SNP stepping up to undermine Con rhetoric on defence and show they are a State in waiting and committed to both European and NATO defence.

    Not sure how the economics would work on that one. Hey ho.

    • I am making $92 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience mass freedom now that I’m my non-public boss. 
      That is what I do.. http://www.profit97.com

  2. It would be interesting to know who the members of the “SNP Westminster Defence Team” are, apart from Stewart McDonald of course.

    • Me, myself and I is a strong team…

      And yet, I would love Labour to stand up and Bravo Sierra on Con defence policy.

      All too often Con MPs wrap themselves up in the flag of the Union and spout brollixs about how they are the party of defence and the opp never call them out – because?

      We need a better opposition, invested in defence and prepared to tell the electorate, we will protect you in your health, on the streets AND from our homeland – but, it will cost.

      Rant over.

      • Better tell Labour’s union pay master’s to elect a stronger leader then, rather then pursuing a socialist day dream that has been rejected by the public many times over the decades.

        • We have to be very careful here. Even under Corbyn a great many of their (financially unviable as they often were) ‘socialist’ policies polled as very popular with the public, it was their muddled Brexit policies and the man himself that proved to be rejected at the election.

          • I don’t economically very liberal policies were popular as people saw through the ridiculous promises such as free broadband. In the North Labour are now begining to look much like they did before the SNP rip them to pieces. Labour are on their last legs and will be rejected by the UK population again. They need socially conservative policies mixed with economically prudent policies focussed on rejuvenating our manufacturing industry. Maybe then theu can stop being the nasty party to the working class.

      • I’m not really sure which party is the least bad for UK defense.

        Labour put in some massive cuts in 1966 and the trend just carried on from there until Brown ordered the QEC’s. Other cuts continued though alongside a wasteful FRES implementation and of course invading Iraq without enough helicopters or body armour.

        Thatcher obviously said yes to Op Corporate but didn’t say yes to HMS Spartan sinking mine layers off Stanley which would have scared off all seaborne reinforcements right at the start.

        Cameron continued with cuts and wasted more on F35B/C/B indecision. Johnson is rightly supporting Ukraine but for his own carear led the Brexit charge which is unforgivable and has been terrible for the economy that pays for our defense and everything else.

      • Labour are a dead party with soclalist policies that the UK will simply not accept. The only place these have traction is in Scotland and that is only because English MPs pander to the SNP. In the North of England Labour are dying on their feet just like they did in Scotland. The truth of the matter is that historically England (prior to the 1920s) had either the centre right Tory party or the Centre right Liberal party…Socialism only gained traction because Labour went on spending splurges but it’s not really compatible with the instinct of the English population which is social conservatism mixed with bouts of economic conservatism punctuated by economic liberalism – when they was a surplus. Labour are the very antithesis of what Britain wants i.e. they are socially liberal and economically incontinent. Unfortunalet for some reason the Tory wants to ape these failed policies…I just don’t understand at all. However, Labour are truly dead as the working class have realised that the Labour party hates them to their core…that’s why they have to import voters to stay in power – just what Blair did…

    • News to me that they have a team as well, would be good to know who’s coming up with these ideas and influencing potential future policy in an independent Scotland.

        • Being that it’s the SNPs sole reason to exist, if it happened I’d like to know who was actually making the decisions.

          • The SNP were a rather small group , until Mel Gibsons Braveheart .Now if they suceed in gaining Independence then it’s only right and fitting that Mel Gibson should be their first President not Wee miss Crankie Just kidding PragmaticScot

  3. Nice to see the UK’s third largest political party take an interest. Would be even better in labour had something to say. Maybe then we could avoid the cuts that are likely in bound from next year.

    • Unfortunately I agree cuts are coming and the joke that is the Russian army has done nothing to support higher spending. I personally think higher spending on naval assets is justified as we will see increased threat from Russia at sea but I doubt the treasury will listen.

      • Who says that cuts are coming – and why? Surely the smallness of our amred forces has now been made clearer to any uniformed polician and to the electorate. Many Europeans are increasing defence spending.

        • One would hope. It’s alright writing off Russian forces but that is naive. Fact is who beyond out small group of professional military is goi g to fight like the Ukrainians are fighting? A lot less than they have that’s for sure esp on the NATO frontline. And fact is as some experts have already stated our tanks and indeed our army and equipment generally would last merely weeks in a war like we see in Ukraine. Yes we might win man for man and tank or plane per tank and plane but even if it was 5 to 1 kill rate we would still lose quickly with little to nothing to back up our frontline forces and at that point the Russians could win with ww2 vintage IS 1 tanks.

          • I spent several of my 34 years in the army facing 3rd Shock Army across the IGB; some at the time considered our equipment, professionalism and doctrine to be superior and would overturn our numerical inferiority totally, but I never did. I never write off any military opponent, as it is dangerous to under-estimate an opponent. The Russians have certainly modified their initial strategy and have lost a lot of men and equipment but they still hold nearly 20% of Ukrainian territory and it will be difficult to impossible to eject them all from the Donbas.
            Some have pointed to Israeli losses in the Yom Kippur war and Russian losses so far in Ukraine and assumed that we would lose our entire tank fleet in a week or so under similar conditions. I am not so sure; we took out 200 enemy tanks for no tank losses (200 to 0 kill ratio) in the first Gulf War, albeit that was in the pre-attack drone era, but I think we would fare better than the Russian Army in 2022 – our equipment, professionalism and doctrine is truly better than the Russians – we handle our armour far better.
            But our three worst enemies are the Treasury (except for UOR funding), meddling politicians and complacency. We are far too small to do well and for long in a European land war, so thank goodness we are bolstered by NATO nations with more manpower and kit.

        • Absolutely Graham. Nearly every European NATO member country is increasing defence spending and ordering additional equipment, the UK is the only one going the other way in slashing personnel and equipment numbers.

          The 2021 defence review looks an increasingly misguided national defence policy, with cuts to our main land and air forces which would be needed in NATO Europe, replaced by penny packets of troops – SFAB training battalions, mini batallions of lightly armed Rangers, a RM Cdo, spread thinly around the globe.

          While the review states that Russia is the main threat to Europe, the review largely ignores that and embarks on an odd policy that looks to have more to do with the politics of Brexit than any sound national defence strategy.

          • I agree, mostly. To configure to meet a Russo-centric threat in Europe might have led (from an army POV) to more forward basing of armour in the Sennelager hub in Germany, at least a brigade stationed in Germany, at least one recce regiment stationed further east perhaps in Poland or the Baltic states, continued use of the high quality and very large BATUS facility for training armoured units, reversal of the 10k manpower cut and the tank numbers cut, increased expenditure on artillery. Just a few examples…and for the RAF to have an equivalent response.
            I don’t see the connection to Brexit, at all – perhaps you can enlighten me.

    • It seems strange to talk of cuts as other European nations are spending more on Defence and there is a war in Europe. Who started this rumour?
      You could argue that there has been no direct conventional threat to the UK since the planned Op Sealion in 1940. We have armed forces for more than Home Defence of course. We have Alliance responsibilities.
      Not sure what your point about Iran and North Korea is all about?

      • Call me cynical, but I think Boris may have promised away any spare money in tax cut etc to stop him self being voted out the other week.

      • Which equates to around 3000k, as the army is about 75,000 strong, well under it’s establishment 82,000.

          • Yes mate, I’d actually forgotten that Wallace gave 500 back. Whoopie doos!

            I’d read it’s current strength is around 75k. But my main original point to Jay R is that some posters, either by design or in innocence, think the army is losing 10k men. It’s losing 10k established posts, as it is well below establishment strength at around 75k already.

            So not losing 10,000 men.

            To a critic twisting things more, 10,000 men cut is a lot worse than the reality of a few thousand is it not?

            I’m amused that Starmer/Labour have mentioned the army cuts and wanting to reverse them. Again to my eye a simpleton offering to the masses when capability, ships, fast jets, transport aircraft and all the rest are of greater importance IMO than a fake 10k headline figure.

            The Army needs capability, structure, role, and it’s CS CSS sorted, not throw away pledges to save a few thousand.

            I’d also be more impressed if they’d pledge to increase FJ numbers, ships, and stop the Herc cuts. Which we know is our in the sky don’t we! Who is the Labour shadow DS anyway?! He seems anonymous!

      • Jay, I thought you were talking about even more cuts. Yes, the 10k cut to the army specifically was announced well over a year ago in SDSR2021. Don’t know if RAF and RN also got cut.

        Hasn’t Iran and NK already got nuclear technology?

      • Nope. More Russian bullshit . The USSR didn’t lose its UNSC seat when the Soviet Union dissolved.

      • You really know very little, but have to put out the chuff otherwise your head shed will decide you are surplus to requirements and give you a drivers seat in a shitty T64, with the option to die for Nazi Russia and Putins glory. “I fought the N-LAW and the N-LAW won”!

      • Nope, what’s left of the UK would be classed as the continuing state, that allows rUK to keep the UN Security Council seat, it does open a few cans of worms on other topics but in reality it just makes sense for rUK to keep the seat with Scotland becoming a new applicant to the UN.

  6. It is clear that Russia will be most delighted if Scotland becomes a member of the European Union.

    China will be delighted too.

    and America will lose its only ally.
    (But there are a lot of allies like Germany left in the US, so there’s nothing to worry about)

      • Do you miss the news of Britain at all?

        During the economic crisis, everyone has pledged to strike as promised.

        Do you think that the military will be able to function quietly when the economy is ruined?

        When more chaos is added (exg: Scottish independence)

        Britain will lose its military power.
        = The United States cannot count on the military power of its only ally, Britain.

        This effectively results in the loss of the United States’ allies as Britain.

        Is this difficult?

        • I find your use of English, interesting…., especially the constant negativity with scenarios that are unlikely to come to pass. Are you another Kremlin morse tapper by any chance?

          Strikes? It’s happened before the economy is still intact. Are strikes “chaos” ? Covid has damaged all economies, including yours no doubt. The UKs can and does recover from these things.

          An independent Scotland would reduce the military but not necessarily it’s usefulness or “military power” as you call it. And considering the unionist vote out numbers the nationalist one, and that the devolved Scottish government has no power to legally call one, I’m not holding my breath!

    • Who is else is ballsy enough to invade Iraq with them? not the Germans for sure. Realistically in military projection terms it’s the US followed by very distant China then the UK and that’s about it in terms of global power projection. France if you want to chase terrorists in the desert but don’t ask them to do anything substantial outside of light colonial duties. Neither Russia or Germany can project power even on their own boarders anymore. Japan can’t leave it’s own coast.

      If your talking soft power and sanctions then the UK is clearly the number two country in the world due to the size and scope of the UK financial system.

      If you look at the majority of military interventions in the past 20 years Kosovo, Libya, Ukraine we’re all UK initiated diplomatic efforts that the US followed us in to.

      We might just be the deputy Sherif but we are the only other country that even gets a badge.

      • “If you look at the majority of military interventions in the past 20 years Kosovo, Libya, Ukraine we’re all UK initiated diplomatic efforts that the US followed us in to.”

        I wouldn’t boast about those, they all turned into total disasters.

        Other than perhaps Sierra Leone we have not exactly left a trail of military interventions that we can be proud of since the Falklands.

        • Your Russian invasion of Ukraine has so far proven to be an utter disaster not just for the Russian military losing over 30 % of their combat forces but most importantly for the Ukrainian civilian population who have suffered appalling warcrimes and genocide at the hands of an undisciplined and barbaric Russian army. Yet you seem so inordinately proud and smug about the destruction and death being wreaked on a peaceful country.

          Nothing in living memory that Russia has ever done could be viewed with pride by anyone who didn’t have a deep psychological disorder .

        • What are you on about Ivan with Kosovo that was a NATO success stopped your dire mates the serbs ethnic cleansing and also stopped the Orcs supplying weapons to the serbs when they came late in the game, to late to make any influence on the matter , you are showing your Orc ways johnski starved of reality and generally malnourished, time for you to scrub that pig pen and wave the Z flag some more in desperate hope.

          • Agreed, he is a nazi troll appeaser who would, in the 1930s, be supporting Hitlers rise to power!

        • Libya for sure but Kosovo was a success and Ukraine going pretty well. But my point is simply that the UK can and does have influence on the global stage behind any other country save the USA and China through its link with the USA and its not simply a one way relationship with the US but reciprocal.

          • Exactly the reason for my fear of Labour getting in with their far left elements, will that link to USA get eroded by their anti US pro EU politics?

          • I think the prospect of Trumpski getting back into power is more scary thing , you could say goodbye to US support to the Ukraine , cant see Labour getting in to power but Starmer has put his foot down on his loony left members.

    • “The United Kingdom of Great Britain, keeping the wheels on Europe since the Spanish succession” 😀

      In fairness it’s not wrong the UK is still very much the linch pin between Europe and the Anglosphere and removing Scotland would greatly diminish the rUK in terms of defence and economy. The cost of moving Faslane alone would be a game changer.

  8. Jesus Christ – you don’t half spout some rubbish- just cause a few sweatys like to paint their face blue (and white) and flounce their kilts around.

    • That’s actually racist levels of abuse. You could be criminally prosecuted for making that statement in the UK now.

      • Racists like the SNP you mean?I think that says more about the levels of WOKEism in the UK PC liberal mindset than it does about me.
        Dont worry about getting all upset & replying, I’ll save you the bother – I’m off.

        • I don’t think you will be missed, no need for abusive xenophobic language like that. You should be ashamed of your self, a grown man speaking like that.

    • That simply isn’t fair, or accurate Grizzler, what of the ginger and ample bodied, you can’t go missing people out you know….

  9. Just what NATO doesn’t need – the balkanisation of Europe into little mini-states – all banging their own little drums.

  10. If Scotland goes independent I shall stop buying Scottish smoked kippers and convert completely to Devonian smoked mackerel. Lovely jumberly!

        • That I have (kind of helps I spent 3 years in the Province) visited Bushmills (But I recommend visiting Mortons chippy in Ballycastle instead) a number of times and partaken of quite a few of the clear illegal stuff as well (now that puts hairs on yer chest) not impressed, funny enough I didn’t touch the stuff until I was posted to Cyprus and found out the hard way you couldn’t buy Night nurse there, full of cold, I bitched like only a bloke can in the Mess (well it was downstairs) and our Turkish barman made me a Hot toddy. Instant Hook.

          • With an ID of Crabfat, i can only presume you were WSBA, I was ESBA so we had the delights of Aya Napa to enjoy.

          • OK, gotta accept the T-shirt every time. Any idea what else was in the toddy, though?
            Notice the limb I went out on, Scotch name, not a Scotch. It gets worse, though. I’m not Scottish – but I was recommended ‘J’ by an ardent Scot!
            Whilst I’m unburdening (it’s such a relief), I might as well let on that the most palatable red wine I came across whilst in the RN was – Chinese; there, I’ve said it. 😨

  11. NATO, not the bungling EU, is the sole guarantor Euro-Atlantic security order.
    Shows how much the SNP knows about defence. It’s laughable to they want an independent Scotland to join NATO, an alliance with nuclear weapons as its ultimate deterrent, yet they want British nukes out of Scotland.
    Seems that all SNP policy is based on hypocrisy.

    • They want want their shortcake and they want to eat it!

      Like the ‘Paper’ but, detest that Labour are behind the curve.

      Hey ho.

      • Get your Labour lot in Scotland to shake themselves down.Their diminishing in stature has been filled by these UK haters.

    • Except many NATO nations don’t want to host nuclear weapons, including both Sweden and Finland who stated as much at the time of their recent applications. Less than half of NATO is part of the nuclear sharing policy and only 3 members actually have their own nuclear weapons, sounds like a lot of people already in NATO benefit from deterrence without hosting it or paying anything towards its development of upkeep.

      • The 3 nuclear partners in Nato (US,UK and France) have put up the nuclear umbrella that the rest of Nato and Europe are happy to live under but paying nothing toward the expense of maintaining the deterrent saving trillions over the decades. Is it not time for those countries to put some money into the pot to help pay for the nuclear umbrella they are all happy to live under. This would allow the US,UK and France to put more money into conventional weapons giving Nato and Europe more conventional capability.

        • Not saying you’re wrong but I don’t get the whole Scotland doesn’t want nukes so shouldn’t be in NATO line, most of NATO doesn’t have or want nukes plus fail to meet the 2% of GDP on defence pledge so let’s not kid ourselves that Scotland (like Finland and Sweden) would still be welcomed into NATO even without wanting to base nuclear weapons.

          • Any body with an once of sense would want to get rid of nuclear weapons but you cannot uninvent them so some of us have to step up and put up that umbrella so that people like Mad Vlad have to think twice before using their nuclear weapons. But that umbrella is getting increasingly harder to afford so the people who have lived under it and have profited by not having to invest in it should now be asked to put there hands in there pocket to help out the countries who have protected their way of life for the last 60 years.
            As far as the 2% is concerned the UK has only just recently reached that maker but if we do not make more funds available for defence I think we will be in a WW111 scenario were all of our GDP will have to be spent on defending ourselves and Nato so in my meagre estimation if would be better to be spending at least 3% right about now on our conventional forces with the nuclear deterrent with its own budget.

          • Sadly that’s for NATO members to sort out, so they ask for a token payment per year, a percentage of operational costs (if so who audits that). Many smaller members of NATO spend very little on defence as their economies are tiny, for context Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania combined have an economy smaller than Scotland let alone Denmark, Sweden or Finland, so the question is do you take a token payment which is meaningless to the nuclear powers or do you provide that protection in return for them spending that money on conventional forces?

            If Scotland were to become independent it would make sense there was cooperation on defence even just as a local matter out with NATO, things like base sharing at Lossiemouth for QRA and MPA or using Faslane for resupply and maintenance of subs, test ranges etc. There’s so much detail that would need to be worked out it won’t be a clear cut split of assets and done like some think.

          • The token payment might be small from some countries but but others like Germany would be quite substantial, the Baltic states are already spending 2% to 2.5% GDP on defence and are now committed to 3% with Denmark already on the 3% threshold.
            My personal thoughts on Scotland are that the current popularity of the SNP is a direct reaction to the inept politicians in Westminster but like all politicians they are good at making promises but are not so good at fulfilling them. I just do not think that the Scottish people are being given the facts about independence, and I do not think they will be able to join the EU or Nato as they will not be able to for fill the criteria to enter either institution. It is a bit like the EU sweet talking the Ukraine at the moment to stop the negative press they have said that the Ukraine can join the EU but in reality it will take years maybe even decades.
            Also there is an old saying “united we stand but divided we fall” we in the South are just as pissed off with the current batch of inept self serving political classes along with a Civil service that needs a good clean out of all the dead wood so maybe the best way would be for the SNP put forward real policy’s in Westminster and become the real opersition as Labour is a spent force with no real policy’s.

          • Just a minor point but Denmark last year spent the equivalent of 1.47% of GDP on defence, they had planned to be at 2% by 2024 but now seems likely that will take until 2030. There’s lots of well off European countries sitting in the 1.1-1.9% bracket who really should be the ones to help reinforce the conventional component of NATO, this includes Germany (1.5%), Italy (1.4%), Spain (1.1%), Netherlands (1.4%) and Belgium (1.1%) plus the aforementioned Denmark. The fact these countries already don’t spend what they are supposed to as per the NATO spending pledge makes getting any contribution towards paying for nuclear forces seem even less likely.

          • The whole of Nato pledged to spend at least 2% but like you say most of the old school Nato members were quite happy to let the USA take the lead while they just played lip service to the 2% rule, the UK included as we were on a the same level as Germany for a while but with Mad Vlad chomping at the bit, I do believe that things are changing with the Baltic states leading the way as they know what it is like to live under the Russian jack boot but the old school Nato country’s like the one you mentioned above are moving towards 2% and with some like Denmark promising 3%.

            I think that it is only a matter of time before Nato takes over the running of a nuclear deterrent. The Americans will defiantly want to keep their own but the UK and France may want to help lead a Nato wide deterrent partly paid for by Nato.

          • I don’t recall that the UK were below 2%, however there is some creative accounting to get us to that figure.

          • If you strip away all the stuff that should not be in the Defence budget we were on a power with Germany I would say we are on or about 2% now but we should be looking at 3% on conventional forces with the nuclear deterrent with its own budget.

          • The nuclear deterrent always used to be directly funded by Treasury and not from the MoD, then it got changed.
            I have it on good authority that some non-Defence intelligence is charged to Defence.
            Then there is the POV that defence pensions should not come out of the MoD budget as this does not amount to capability – it would be interesting to see if teachers pensions come out of the Edn budget etc.
            I agree with your proposal, but there are ‘no votes in defence’, so it won’t happen.

          • I think Mad Vlad will change the voters thinking on defence, and as far as the Nuclear deterrent is funded, we should be looking to Nato and the EU for extra funding to help with the Nuclear deterrent as they all have profited from living under the umbrella put up be the US/UK and France now that Mad Vlad is openly talking of using his nuclear arsenal we should be remining the rest of Nato/Europe that a Nuclear deterrent is expensive so some help in financing it would be good.

          • British voters seem to be interested in Partygate and Boris’ trustworthiness, cost of living, rail strike etc. Has the electorate ever been interested in spending more on Defence since WW2?

          • Oh I don’t know about that, there is a lot of people who think about the state of our armed forces but with the media and political elite against the armed forces it deliberately kept in the back burners so that the general public thinks all is OK.
            If you look at the invasion of the Ukraine for the first 2/3 week it was 24/7 now you hardly hear anything in the news now as the government dose not want the pressure from the public asking what has happed to out armed forces and we should be getting the army up to scratch.
            They are happy to have the public moaning about the rail strike and the cost of living as they do not have to spend any more money but if the public actually know about the state of the UK’s armed forces then they would have to start to spend real money on sorting it out.
            I believe it is up to people like us on these sort of sites to let the public know about the state of our armed force and to point the finger squarely at the people who are systematically destroying the UK’s ability to defend itself.

          • I agree. The reductions are staggering. From 28 attack subs in 1981/2 to just 7 now. From 50 DD/FF at the same time to just 18 today. From a Corps of four armoured divisions (plus an armoured brigade in Berlin) to a struggle to deploy a single ‘heavy’ division today, in fact probably we could just deploy one or 2 ‘heavy’ brigades only.

          • One of the reasons I started to comment on this site is that I thought that it might get some of the people at the top of the tree to sit-up and actually think about what they are doing to this country. But there seems to be an under current of people who seem to be on this and other site like this one to belittle any one who dear contradict the government and it policy’s. We have our shear of Russian Troll on this site but also government trolls who are just here to make a mockery of any and all arguments that might mean the government and the MoD is wrong.

          • Thanks Steven. I just hope that the people at the top read this site and filter out the comments from the trolls, fantasists etc. I proudly served as an officer for 34 years and served in many parts of the world and saw many diferent facets of army and joint missions.

            Our current and many past governments deserve to be criticised for many aspects of defence policy and for decisions that have weakened our armed forces and imperilled lives.
            One example and there are plemty others.
            When I was in Afghanistan I felt that we had been deployed to the wrong Province, had less than a third of the manpower we needed and much of the equipment initially was unsuited to the mission (that was perhaps understandable as no-one could have foreseen an Afghan deployment before 9/11). Also development of new ‘heavy metal’ equipment including tube artillery for core use was de-prioritised, such that the army is in a total mess with such kit today.

  13. Is this a pitch for a book you’re writing or something as it’s pure fiction. Putin couldn’t care less about an independent Scotland, the EU won’t rule over anyone whether there’s a monarchy or not and NATO will still be a potent defensive alliance with or without an independent Scotland as long as the US is the guarantor of Western security.

    • QRA North would likely be a joint matter, there’s a variety of options and most involve base sharing at Lossiemouth, it’s a fantastic location for both QRA and MPA to launch from.

      If you look at Denmark, Norway, Finland etc. I think it would be fair to say Scotland could have a fast jet force but if it was starting from scratch that’s at least a decade before everything is in place. In the interim joint squadrons, similar to 11 & 12 squadrons with Qatar, would probably work out best to allow for training and to help share costs while that capability is developed.

  14. I cannot abide all you Nostradamus’, claiming in no uncertain terms what Que Sera.
    I’m the only one who knows the future – but don’t think for one moment you’ll be able to call me out. I’ve a cunning plan to die long before then. Aha!

    • Not sure your walls analogy is a good one. Which countries of the UK are splitting? Scotland rejected independence in 2014 and Sturgeon cannot persuade Boris to have another one. Plaid Cymru don’t even run Wales – they are minnows. The Northern Irish have not lobbied for a border poll and many in the RoI don’t want unification if their taxes have to go up.

  17. 3% would be a very good start!
    “Defence minister reiterates UK’s commitment to Ukraine and NATO

    Leo Docherty, who is the UK’s defence minister, reiterated the government’s commitment to Ukraine and NATO in the House of Commons.
     
    “The United Kingdom and NATO stand with Ukraine. We are providing political and practical support to support its self-defence and will further strengthen NATO’s deterrence and defence posture,” he said. 
    He added that the UK has increased support to Ukraine, bringing the total budget to £1.3bn
    . 
    According to Mr Docherty, the UK has sent over 6,900 anti-tank missiles, five air defence systems, 120 armoured vehicles, as well as other weapons and non-lethal aid.
     
    He added that “we got the balance right” when asked about sending NATO forces to Ukraine.

    Meanwhile, Conservative Party chairman of the Defence Committee Tobias Ellwood said the UK needs to upgrade defence spending to 3% “if we are serious about preventing conflict spreading in Europe”.

    He said: “We are overloading our troops with these widening commitments and not replenishing our defence stocks fast enough.
    “All three services are now too small to manage the ever-greater burden that we are now going to place on them and those cuts in the 2021 Integrated Review of personnel and military equipment must now be reversed.”

  18. With all that doom and gloom im grateful That on the 19th June was granted the freedom of the City of Portsmouth my fellow shipmates can rest easy now before your Predictions come true Jay

  19. Poor old Prince Andrew and all the trouble he has landed himself in too cap it all as a Falklands Veteran he now has the freedom of the City of Portsmouth can things get any worse for him . SORRY too all Pompey lads just had too post this little fact

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here