SDR 2024/25

There is to be another Strategic Defence Review, its being going for a while just showing that all new governments need one; and I am of the view that it is clear that the Tories left the Armed Forces in a very poor position. This was first made in Dec 14, and I made a series of major revisions on publication of the review. Here as ever are my links and notes …

It’s out

1. The Strategic Defence Review 2025 – Making Britain Safer: secure at home, strong abroad, at the HMG site.
2. ‘Organised irresponsibility’: How Britain’s defence strategy clings to a bygone world by Mary Kaldor & Luke Cooper; this I find excellent. My reaction is that, “Once again, the military are preparing for the last war, and not the next. The weapons are wrong, the alliances are wrong, there’s insufficient investment in the state & people’s resilience, be it cyber-security or social security,”.
3. The Strategic Defence Review: Implications and implementation , by the Council on Geostrategy, they say, “In Episode 7, Viktorija Starych-Samuolienė, our Co-founder (Strategy), and Paul Mason, journalist, author and our Associate Fellow, are joined by Kevin Craven, CEO, ADS Group, and Air Marshal (rtd.) Edward Stringer CB CBE, Director, iJ7, and Senior Fellow, Policy Exchange. Viktorija, Paul, Kevin and Edward explore the Strategic Defence Review and its implications for industry, military personnel and Britain’s international partners.” NB the panelist disagree with my analysis, although Stringer, the only veteran, asks a number of questions, on innovation, which is a synonym for cheap, that the paper while Nato first, is not NATO only and they argue for “People, Ideas and Materiale” and in that order.

Further notes from the Council on Geostrategy video, there are five domains, the classic three, plus space and Cyber. Is industrial capability a 6th domain? (I mean, yes, but has the UK forgotten this?) How does the UK military get into space? While there is a need for “stuff in the locker”, we also need people to be resting; can this be provided by the Reserves? What damage do the fiscal rules cause to the military, it seems they certainly retire material before others do. They discussed building for export and the need for “exquisite” weapons, and Stringer raised the question of escalation theory in the light of the decision to buy air-launched tactical nuclear weapons; it seems the British military don’t know how to use them. The big unanswered question for me, is does this not tie us even closer to the US.

The making of …

The SDR has issued a “call for evidence”; which has a link to the Terms of Reference.

Mary Kaldor critiques the Terms of Reference in the Chartist.

A starting point is that we live in a world in which we face existential threats to humanity, including, but not only, a major war. National security used to mean the defence of British people and British territory from attacks by a foreign state. Nowadays, the only way to guarantee the security of British people and British territory is through a more secure world. This is why a contemporary version of national security needs to be based on human security, which is about the security of individual human beings and the communities in which they live anywhere in the planet, from both physical threats (violence) and material threats (famine, climate change, pandemics etc.), not to mention virtual threats emanating from cyber attacks and misinformation. Human security is linked to the idea of a law based world, especially international humanitarian law and human rights law, what Ruti Teitel calls ‘humanity’s law’. And human security entails a collective approach where the UK contributes to global efforts to address existential threats.

Mary Kaldor – The Chartist

Articles on this wiki, tagged ‘defence’. See also UK Defence Review 2020 and Defending the UK both on this wiki and articles on on my blog tagged ‘defence’.

1. Strategy, mostly Paul Mason,
   • on his substack, “the challenges facing the strategic defence review” , I summarise on my diigo entry, “… on the need for good results from the SDR24. He argues we need an effective threat definition, and a comprehensive military capability, capable of defence, requiring the reinvestment in defence manufacturing. He also argues that the UK also needs to invest in the multilateral rule of law institutions but does not mention the ICC.”
   • What would UK rearmament cost? dated March 16th 2024, he argies to plug the gaps, sustain Ukraine, rearm. This is a concise and effective definition of the problem, and asks some questions on the macro-economic impact; Paul is optimistic that the multiplier effect makes it highly positive.
   • Mason again, on the expenditure needs of an effective defence policy, UK defence spending debate gets real on Medium, “The three unanswered questions in British defence policy circles remain, however: by how much, why and how to spend it?“
   • Trump victory poses tough strategic choices for UK by Mason on medium. We need to stand with Ukraine, develop a Euro-centric vision for NATO and hike defence spending. He mentions in passing the possible asymmetric warfare from MAGA, and the constitutional (and treaty) constraints on European state borrowing. One fear highlighted is that Trump’s US will reduce its intelligence contribution to NATO. He also talks of the need for an integrated manufacturing capability if there is to be a European led NATO.
   • My views on my blog on Labour’s 23 defence debate, where I argued that Labour’s defence policy was designed to protect the leadership from the Labour Left be they pacifists or paleo-stalinists, and on Johnson’s defence splurge., dated 2020, where I criticise the return East of Suez, and finish with, “Outside the EU, NATO becomes important than ever, and as socialists we need to oppose our continued co-option to the USA’s dreams of a Pax-Americana.”
2. Security of supply
   • One critical Army weapon bought from the USA is the Guided multiple launch rocket system (gmlrs) made by Lockheed Martin, Google AU reports, “Lockheed Martin Missiles and Fire Control manufactures the M270 Multiple Launch Rocket System (MLRS). The British army’s M270B1 is an upgraded version of the American M270 MLRS” See also another British Army reference to the HIMARs. The MoD is buying more.
   • Mason again, To GCAP or not to GCAP, he argues that we need the capability, and security of supply, and that in the short term we could/should get some more Typhoons aka Eurofighter and suspend the F35 purchases. He interestingly categorises the military weaknesses of the F35.
   • https://www.raf.mod.uk/news/articles/rafs-first-wedgetail-reveals-new-colours/ designed and manufactured in the USA, with US avionics. Some work is done in Birmingham.
   • The CAAT view on the UK’s US purchases, May 2021.
3. Equipment issues
   • See my blog on army helicopters and Tanks.
   • On size and equipment, the US DOD occasionally suggests they are concerned.
   • An article on the recent cuts; Britain’s defence cuts outlined and explained from the UK defence journal site.
4. Software
   • When considering the implications of the Trump/Putin phone call on Ukraine, and JD Vance’s speech to the Munich Security conference, I was reminded of Corey Doctorow’s article suggesting that Canada disown the prohibition on decryption of protected content, In it he identifies the practices of some companies i.e. Tesla & HP of charging for function and enforcing using software. Militaries around the world need to reassess the relatability and transparency of military software. See also the four freedoms are defined by GNU.

---