The British Army has ben left so depleted by years of cuts and declining troop levels that it would only be able to take a small market town – on a good day – a former general has said.
General Sir Richard Barrons said UK land forces would be unable to do anything ‘substantial’ in a war and would only be able to help out with small tasks in operations led by the US or Nato.
The former senior soldier, who co-wrote Labour’s Strategic Defence Review (SDR) last year, spoke out amid an ongoing row over the state of the Armed Forces in light of the US-led war with Iran and increasing Russian belligerence in Europe.
On Monday Sir Keir Starmer insisted the Government was ‘nearly there’ with completing its delayed defence investment plan (DIP) but declined to say when it would be published. It was due to be unveiled last autumn.
The main focus of concern has been on the Royal Navy amid fury at the time it took to send one ship, HMS Dragon, to help defend Cyprus from Iranian missiles.
But concerns have been raised for many years about the manpower strength of the Army, which has fallen from 156,000 at the end of the Cold War to around 73,000 now.
Speaking to the BBC Radio 4’s Briefing Room programme, General Barrons, who now works for the Chatham House policy institute, said: ‘The armed forces that we have now, because of their size, but also because of their sophistication, can make a very small contribution on land, in the air and at sea, to an enterprise either led by the US or more likely a Nato undertaking.
‘What it cannot do is anything substantial.’
He went on: ‘Today’s army frankly could do one very small thing, essentially it could seize a small market town on a good day.’
General Sir Richard Barrons said UK land forces would be unable to do anything ‘substantial’ in a war and would only be able to help out with small tasks in operations led by the US or Nato
Concerns have been raised for many years about the manpower strength of the Army, which has fallen from 156,000 at the end of the Cold War to around 73,000 now.
Yesterday defence minister Al Carns followed the PMN in being coy about when the DIP might be published, telling MPs it would be done when ‘feasible’.
Shadow defence secretary James Cartlidge said the delay had ‘left the UK vulnerable as the world becomes more dangerous’, adding: Yesterday, the Prime Minister was unable to answer that simple question.
‘It means that, at a time of war and conflict on multiple fronts, and amid the most dangerous time for our country since the cold war, instead of delivering rapid rearmament, Labour is presiding over a procurement freeze.’
Last summer the authors of Britain’s Strategic Defence Review warned Britain’s Armed Forces aren’t ready to fight a war against a military with similar capabilities.
In a stark assessment, the report said that our forces are better suited ‘to a peacetime era’ and are ‘not currently optimised for warfare against a ‘peer’ military state’.
The externally-led Strategic Defence Review (SDR), written by former Nato secretary general Lord Robertson, retired general Sir Richard Barrons and Russia expert Fiona Hill, was described as the most profound change to defence in 150 years.
In the event of war, Britain would be subject to attacks on its military bases at home and abroad, long-range drone and cruise missile sorties, cyber-attacks crippling national infrastructure and disruptions to economic interests and international trade routes.
The SDR states that the defence medical services couldn’t cope with a mass casualty event and that the military is suffering from a recruitment crisis which means only a small number of troops could be deployed.
The document added: ‘The UK is entering a new era of threat and challenge. The West’s long-held military advantage is being eroded as other countries modernise and expand their armed forces at speed.’
