"Russian threat" helps Britain to save the defense budget
The UK began a review of its defense strategy based on new threats - the IG and Russia. The British are in solidarity with the main allies - the United States, who will help partners in their work on the strategy. Putting pressure on the “Russian threat”, the British not only act in tandem with the Americans, but also try to defend the interests of their military-industrial complex, saving the defense budget from cuts.
"We have to admit that the atmosphere of external threats is getting thicker," said Philip Dunn, a representative of the British Defense Ministry, who is the so-called junior minister responsible for logistics and logistics (which roughly corresponds to the Deputy Minister of Defense for Procurement in the Russian tradition). Thus, during his visit to the United States, he described the first in the last five years review of the national defense strategy of Great Britain. The threats that Dunn has identified are considered very serious by his American counterparts: this is the “Islamic State”, as well as Russia. And to review the defense strategy of the kingdom will be with the participation of the United States.
Russia on a par with IG
The UK has finally embarked on a review of the national defense and security strategy, as Philip Dunn announced at a lunch organized by the consulting company of former US Secretary of Defense William Cohen. The goal is to “refresh the national risk assessment”, taking into account the emerging “threats”. The composition and technical equipment of the armed forces of the kingdom will undergo changes in order to combat the "Islamic state" and "contain Russia", reports "Interfax" with reference to the American online edition Defense one.
“Russia is testing our readiness, and we give an adequate response to every attempt,” said Dunn, talking to his American colleagues. Under the tests of strength, he meant the flights of Russian combat aircraft near the airspace of the kingdom, as well as other European countries, as reported with enviable periodicity. Military aircraft of the Royal Air Force, in order to give answers, are in constant readiness at two air bases of the country, the minister said. Starting next year, the Typhoon British multi-role fighters will resume patrolling the airspace of the Baltic countries.
Philip Dunn talked about this in the United States for a reason. The purpose of his visit, according to the minister himself, was to “invite the United States to take part in reviewing our defense and security strategy.”
Budget interest
Britain has previously stated the need to increase defense spending over the next five years. The reason was called both the threat from the ISIS and “Russian aggression”. Prime Minister David Cameron said in mid-July that he would do everything possible to provide for the country drones, spy planes and elite military units, "providing a unique opportunity to counter threats at their point of origin." Of particular danger, he said, is the "evolving threat" of terrorism. The increasing aggressiveness of Russia, along with ISIS and hackers, is one of the main threats facing the UK, he said.
Cameron’s promises were also supported by Defense Minister Michael Fallon, who said that next year the country would raise its defense budget to 2 percent of GDP, which is required of all NATO member states.
However, in front of Cameron, who traditionally calls for all forces to be thrown at war, there are a number of significant obstacles that neither Fellon nor his colleague Philip Dunn are talking about. All actions must be approved by Parliament, where there are a sufficient number of opponents of the increase in defense spending.
As recently as July 21, Finance Minister George Osborne said that the country’s budget would have to be reduced by another 20 billion pounds. The budgets of all departments are proposed to reduce by 25 – 40 percent, moreover, more recently, the reduction of social expenditures on 12 billion pounds has been already approved. This caused a storm of indignation among the residents of Great Britain and even resulted in protests and clashes with the police. Especially, the inhabitants are outraged by the fact that the government allows them to cut social programs, but does not touch the defense sphere.
Martin McCauley, an expert on Russia at the University of London, in an interview with the RT television channel noted that the Russian threat is being inflated by British politicians precisely in order to defend the defense budget. We are not talking about its increase - it is important to at least avoid its reduction. “In a recent speech, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond compared the“ threat ”coming from Russia to the Islamic State grouping in order to form an image of a“ huge and evil bear ”and thus defend the costs incurred by the treasury, which requires all ministries to cut the budget.” - he recalled. The expert also called these statements "posturing", since Russia's potential does not mean that it is going to attack the UK.
Recall that in the 2015 year, the UK reduced its military budget to its lowest level in the last 25 years. Expenditures should be only 1,88% of GDP, while in 2014, this figure was higher than that required by the Alliance - 2,07%.
Saving instead of waste
Viktor Murakhovsky, editor-in-chief of the Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine, notes that, despite all the statements made by the representatives of Great Britain, no additional funds have been allocated for the defense of the kingdom in recent years. “They do not increase the military budget. In the framework of the current economic situation in Europe as a whole and in Britain in particular, this is not even a question. Statements about the desire to increase defense spending in the last five years are made on the basis of absolute values. If you look at the share of military expenditures in the military budget, it remains unchanged, ”explains Murakhovsky in an interview with the newspaper VIEW.
They are not ready to increase costs: this is not visible either in their programs or in capabilities. “They abandoned the modernization program of their armored vehicles, they are experiencing serious difficulties with the maintenance of even the current composition of the naval fleet. amount tanks, which they planned to keep on constant alert, reduced from 400 to 250. There are many serious problems that have to be saved, ”Murakhovsky notes.
Saved funds are allowed to participate in joint European programs, the expert said. “For example, on the creation of a single European military transport aircraft A-400. They also plan to purchase fifth-generation American fighter F-35, which will require huge expenses. The emphasis is on the development of expeditionary capabilities: this is the Air Force, the fleet and small ground units, mainly special forces. ”
In the bombing of Libya, the main role was played by the shock aviation France and the UK, and even then shortcomings in resources and in the availability of high-precision means of the aviation situation affected. “At the end of this campaign, the British Air Force experienced significant difficulties. If the question was about a large-scale war, then it is clear that the British Air Force cannot cope with such tasks. They participate in attacks on the positions of the IG, but it is difficult to call a large-scale operation. When the bombing of Yugoslavia took place, Britain also made a small contribution to the air raids. The main burden fell on American aviation, ”Murakhovsky reminded. - The country now does not focus its forces on conducting independent large-scale hostilities. At best, it appears as one of the elements of the NATO military machine in the European theater of operations. ”
Course on the loss of sovereignty
Britain does not play any independent role within the framework of the so-called containment of Russia, the source concludes. “They are only an element within the military structure of NATO. They are actively involved in joint exercises, including in the Baltic States, as well as in the west of Ukraine, but they participate symbolically - the forces are insignificant. Without the support of NATO, Britain will not even be able to wage a regional war, ”the expert believes.
Britain has traditionally focused on the navy, but it has also declined significantly since World War II. “He is no longer the second in the world, as it was several decades ago. Nevertheless, it has a number of components that are very important for the defense of the country: these are nuclear-powered submarines with ballistic missiles. But it must be kept in mind that these are American, not British rockets, ”Murakhovsky recalled.
The Alliance cannot allocate funds to Britain because it simply does not fall within its area of responsibility, the expert recalled. “NATO as a structure does not have an independent budget, does not engage in arms procurement. They conduct coordination work, allocating money only for the maintenance of management structures. For the rest, only the NATO countries themselves are engaged in providing their armed forces, ”he noted.
A joint discussion of defense strategy fits into the format of relations that has developed between the UK and the United States, the source said. “The British are the main military ally of the States. They support all the military operations that they have carried out in the last 20 years. Given that this is a nuclear power, the military alliance is very serious, - said Murakhovsky. - It is clear that they almost completely coordinate their strategy with the United States. Of course, this is a course for the loss of sovereignty, ”he added.
The partnership explains the common threats that the United States and the United Kingdom have noted for themselves - IS and Russia. “As for the questions of Russia, the British even acted here with voices. The Iron Curtain was invented not by the Americans, but by the British. This is a British policy that has been implemented for centuries, ”he recalled.
"We have to admit that the atmosphere of external threats is getting thicker," said Philip Dunn, a representative of the British Defense Ministry, who is the so-called junior minister responsible for logistics and logistics (which roughly corresponds to the Deputy Minister of Defense for Procurement in the Russian tradition). Thus, during his visit to the United States, he described the first in the last five years review of the national defense strategy of Great Britain. The threats that Dunn has identified are considered very serious by his American counterparts: this is the “Islamic State”, as well as Russia. And to review the defense strategy of the kingdom will be with the participation of the United States.
Russia on a par with IG
The UK has finally embarked on a review of the national defense and security strategy, as Philip Dunn announced at a lunch organized by the consulting company of former US Secretary of Defense William Cohen. The goal is to “refresh the national risk assessment”, taking into account the emerging “threats”. The composition and technical equipment of the armed forces of the kingdom will undergo changes in order to combat the "Islamic state" and "contain Russia", reports "Interfax" with reference to the American online edition Defense one.
“Russia is testing our readiness, and we give an adequate response to every attempt,” said Dunn, talking to his American colleagues. Under the tests of strength, he meant the flights of Russian combat aircraft near the airspace of the kingdom, as well as other European countries, as reported with enviable periodicity. Military aircraft of the Royal Air Force, in order to give answers, are in constant readiness at two air bases of the country, the minister said. Starting next year, the Typhoon British multi-role fighters will resume patrolling the airspace of the Baltic countries.
Philip Dunn talked about this in the United States for a reason. The purpose of his visit, according to the minister himself, was to “invite the United States to take part in reviewing our defense and security strategy.”
Budget interest
Britain has previously stated the need to increase defense spending over the next five years. The reason was called both the threat from the ISIS and “Russian aggression”. Prime Minister David Cameron said in mid-July that he would do everything possible to provide for the country drones, spy planes and elite military units, "providing a unique opportunity to counter threats at their point of origin." Of particular danger, he said, is the "evolving threat" of terrorism. The increasing aggressiveness of Russia, along with ISIS and hackers, is one of the main threats facing the UK, he said.
Cameron’s promises were also supported by Defense Minister Michael Fallon, who said that next year the country would raise its defense budget to 2 percent of GDP, which is required of all NATO member states.
However, in front of Cameron, who traditionally calls for all forces to be thrown at war, there are a number of significant obstacles that neither Fellon nor his colleague Philip Dunn are talking about. All actions must be approved by Parliament, where there are a sufficient number of opponents of the increase in defense spending.
As recently as July 21, Finance Minister George Osborne said that the country’s budget would have to be reduced by another 20 billion pounds. The budgets of all departments are proposed to reduce by 25 – 40 percent, moreover, more recently, the reduction of social expenditures on 12 billion pounds has been already approved. This caused a storm of indignation among the residents of Great Britain and even resulted in protests and clashes with the police. Especially, the inhabitants are outraged by the fact that the government allows them to cut social programs, but does not touch the defense sphere.
Martin McCauley, an expert on Russia at the University of London, in an interview with the RT television channel noted that the Russian threat is being inflated by British politicians precisely in order to defend the defense budget. We are not talking about its increase - it is important to at least avoid its reduction. “In a recent speech, British Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond compared the“ threat ”coming from Russia to the Islamic State grouping in order to form an image of a“ huge and evil bear ”and thus defend the costs incurred by the treasury, which requires all ministries to cut the budget.” - he recalled. The expert also called these statements "posturing", since Russia's potential does not mean that it is going to attack the UK.
Recall that in the 2015 year, the UK reduced its military budget to its lowest level in the last 25 years. Expenditures should be only 1,88% of GDP, while in 2014, this figure was higher than that required by the Alliance - 2,07%.
Saving instead of waste
Viktor Murakhovsky, editor-in-chief of the Arsenal of the Fatherland magazine, notes that, despite all the statements made by the representatives of Great Britain, no additional funds have been allocated for the defense of the kingdom in recent years. “They do not increase the military budget. In the framework of the current economic situation in Europe as a whole and in Britain in particular, this is not even a question. Statements about the desire to increase defense spending in the last five years are made on the basis of absolute values. If you look at the share of military expenditures in the military budget, it remains unchanged, ”explains Murakhovsky in an interview with the newspaper VIEW.
They are not ready to increase costs: this is not visible either in their programs or in capabilities. “They abandoned the modernization program of their armored vehicles, they are experiencing serious difficulties with the maintenance of even the current composition of the naval fleet. amount tanks, which they planned to keep on constant alert, reduced from 400 to 250. There are many serious problems that have to be saved, ”Murakhovsky notes.
Saved funds are allowed to participate in joint European programs, the expert said. “For example, on the creation of a single European military transport aircraft A-400. They also plan to purchase fifth-generation American fighter F-35, which will require huge expenses. The emphasis is on the development of expeditionary capabilities: this is the Air Force, the fleet and small ground units, mainly special forces. ”
In the bombing of Libya, the main role was played by the shock aviation France and the UK, and even then shortcomings in resources and in the availability of high-precision means of the aviation situation affected. “At the end of this campaign, the British Air Force experienced significant difficulties. If the question was about a large-scale war, then it is clear that the British Air Force cannot cope with such tasks. They participate in attacks on the positions of the IG, but it is difficult to call a large-scale operation. When the bombing of Yugoslavia took place, Britain also made a small contribution to the air raids. The main burden fell on American aviation, ”Murakhovsky reminded. - The country now does not focus its forces on conducting independent large-scale hostilities. At best, it appears as one of the elements of the NATO military machine in the European theater of operations. ”
Course on the loss of sovereignty
Britain does not play any independent role within the framework of the so-called containment of Russia, the source concludes. “They are only an element within the military structure of NATO. They are actively involved in joint exercises, including in the Baltic States, as well as in the west of Ukraine, but they participate symbolically - the forces are insignificant. Without the support of NATO, Britain will not even be able to wage a regional war, ”the expert believes.
Britain has traditionally focused on the navy, but it has also declined significantly since World War II. “He is no longer the second in the world, as it was several decades ago. Nevertheless, it has a number of components that are very important for the defense of the country: these are nuclear-powered submarines with ballistic missiles. But it must be kept in mind that these are American, not British rockets, ”Murakhovsky recalled.
The Alliance cannot allocate funds to Britain because it simply does not fall within its area of responsibility, the expert recalled. “NATO as a structure does not have an independent budget, does not engage in arms procurement. They conduct coordination work, allocating money only for the maintenance of management structures. For the rest, only the NATO countries themselves are engaged in providing their armed forces, ”he noted.
A joint discussion of defense strategy fits into the format of relations that has developed between the UK and the United States, the source said. “The British are the main military ally of the States. They support all the military operations that they have carried out in the last 20 years. Given that this is a nuclear power, the military alliance is very serious, - said Murakhovsky. - It is clear that they almost completely coordinate their strategy with the United States. Of course, this is a course for the loss of sovereignty, ”he added.
The partnership explains the common threats that the United States and the United Kingdom have noted for themselves - IS and Russia. “As for the questions of Russia, the British even acted here with voices. The Iron Curtain was invented not by the Americans, but by the British. This is a British policy that has been implemented for centuries, ”he recalled.
Information