The Scottish Affairs Committee calls on the UK Government to re-assess its defence presence in Scotland in the face of new threats in the North Atlantic and High North region, as it publishes the third report of its inquiry into Defence in Scotland.
The North Atlantic and High North, including the Arctic, are of increasing strategic importance to the UK’s defence and security argue the report.
“Russia is increasing its military presence in the region, climate change is reshaping the Arctic and economic activity in the area is on the rise.”
Scotland is home to a number of UK military and naval assets and bases which currently provide Quick Reaction Alert air response from RAF Lossiemouth, deploying and defending the UK’s nuclear deterrent from HMNB Clyde in Faslane, and policing the strategically important Greenland-Iceland-UK gap. During its inquiry, the Committee heard evidence from the UK Government about the importance of maintaining both these capabilities. Whilst not all Members of the Committee support this view, the report notes that the Committee recognised the serious implications for the UK and NATO should the nuclear fleet ever be removed from Faslane.
In a new report, Defence in Scotland: The North Atlantic and the High North, the cross-party Committee of MPs notes the UK Government’s continued recognition of Scotland’s important role in meeting the UK and NATO’s defence and security objectives in the region, and calls for clarity on how the UK’s defence presence could be increased sufficiently if required.
Commenting on the report, Pete Wishart MP, Chair of the Scottish Affairs Committee, said:
“The North Atlantic and the High North are becoming increasingly important to the defence interests of both the UK and NATO, and Scotland’s role in the defence arrangements is considered to be fundamental. During our inquiry we heard widespread agreement that the Arctic is of growing strategic importance and maintaining a well maintained and resourced military capability is essential to meet The UK’s defence interests. Because of its geography Scotland is home to a number of the UK’s strategic military assets and in our report we call on the UK Government to look at how the defence presence in Scotland could be scaled up if required to meet future threats if required. We are also calling for a review of the UK’s cold weather capabilities.
We also looked at the opportunities and threats that may emerge because of climate change in the Arctic and the High North. Emerging trade routes and the responsibility of protecting offshore and subsea infrastructure are likely to become emerging priorities in a fast changing environment. As a Committee, we’ve conducted a series of work on Defence in Scotland, and it’s clear to all the considerable contribution Scotland makes to the UK and NATO’s defence and security. This is a topic we will be keeping a close eye on. We wish to extend our gratitude to all those who work to defend us and keep us safe.”
The UK Air defence region is vast, over the North Sea and beyond, coupled with a thawing North Pole, a squadron of P8s will not suffice. But not to worry MOD, the UK’s Nato partners (USA) will cover it. (They could put the 2 wedgetail radars on a couple of fishing vessels ha).
Ah well you are correct for the first time in a long while, the P8s will not be sufficient to cover that task and the others it will get. However you then go back to your normal routine of being wrong and troll like in your post. Norway can also cover the gap (did you know that?) and Germany is looking at buying a few with plans to also form a P8 NATO Sqn (ah NATO, that military alliance who work together), and you are also confusing two platform, one the P8 and the other a 737 with wedgetail radar. Never mind eh!
Not confusing the platforms, wedgetail has a maritime function. The UK sadly ordered too many radars, they only needed 3, not 5.
They ordered the 5 radars and the 5 platforms, they didn’t order to many just reduced the platform numbers, possibly subject to change.
And you also ignored my reply in regard to P8 numbers and users!
Been said before, an extra T26 and or a few more ASW T31s, and P-8s and maybe a few AOPVs to help patrol this area in increased strength in support of the alliance. And if doable why not re-commission the last 1-2 T boats to build up subs numbers before Astutes are all in service! And why not a RN naval base up in NE Scotland so ships can be based closer to these regions? Will save some fuel and time to end locations and spreads Amy concentration of the fleet around more bases.
lots of potential in Orkney! why not re-activate Lyness?
☺. Then there’s Invergordon, and a refocus on Leith?
In the future, we may see conflict over resources in the Polar regions. That is why I would like to see all future RN ships, get ice hardened hulls. Even if just to the basic IC category. That would allow safe operation in ice up to 0.4m thick.
Read some where, Naval Lookout I think, that Babcock is working on a ice hardened ASW A140 possibly for Norway, why not a few for the RN too, even NZ… that bits for Klonkie!
Like the Canadian Harry Dewolf AOPVs, maybe replacing the River B1s, could be good for Falklands and Far North.
Yes, I saw that Babcock was working on an ice hardened hull being an option on Arrowhead 140. NZ has ice hardened the hull of its new tanker.
Canada is leaning towards NATO assistance in the subarctic and Arctic archipelago for surveillance and ocean patrols. A slight reversal from the past strategy that the Canadian armed forces and government had that it was a manageable task.
The Canadian arctic is vast.
A bunch of MPs call for clarity on how the UK’s defence presence could be increased sufficiently if required to cover the North Atlantic and the High North!
Increase the money going to Defence. Vote down any budget that doesn’t, and any legislation until the money is found. Without more money, the UK’s defence presence can’t be increased sufficiently. Even then this needs to be done for years ahead of time to allow ramping up. Clear enough?
Chipping in to the Norwegian programme of satellites in highly eccentric orbits over the pole would be a start. They will soon be putting a couple up with US SATCOM payloads. I’d guess it’s far too late to add UK payload but they only have a ten year life and now’s the time to plan for more. The Russians are adding another four HEO satellites to their already extensive collection, but I doubt they’ll let us use them.