RESUSCITATE ARMY'S AILING OFFER

Even the most fleeting of flick throughs of the Strategic Defence Review should be enough to satisfy concerned readers that the smelling salts of Russian expansionism – characterised by Putin’s unflinching tolerance of equipment and human life-consuming attritional warfare – and a US seemingly less willing to stand shoulder-to-shoulder with its European and NATO allies, have hit the right nostrils.

As the Chief of the General Staff attests in his foreword, a tangible change in trajectory – informed by carefully considered input from the Service’s leadership – has been set and the UK has been awoken from a 30-plus year Defence spending slumber that has inflicted significant ‘bed sores’ on the Army.

Remedial action to reset and revitalise the ranks is underway and, vitally, money to fund enhanced armour, long-range weapons and land drone swarms – in a bid to make the British Army ten times more lethal than it is today – is incoming.

New capabilities and a tighter embrace of tech alone will not, however, be enough to deliver the British Army that “NATO wants” and the “nation needs” if the third aspiration identified by General Sir Roly Walker – an Army “our soldiers deserve” – is not met. The trilogy of targets presented by the Chief of the General Staff in this issue of The British Army Review are inherently linked and consequently crucial to the rebuild has to be a steadfast acknowledgment that people are the critical component of Defence capability and that – as underlined by a former Intelligence Corps officer on the pages that follow – there is an undeniable quality in quantity.

The Review’s aim to get more pairs of feet in combat boots and increase the number of full-time troops to at least 76,000 is therefore most welcome (as was the Government’s earlier announcement that the new Armed Forces Recruitment Service, launching in 2027, will streamline and expedite the process for prospective recruits wishing to serve). But as important as getting new faces through barrack room doors will be the battle to retain them and keep those of you already in receipt of the King’s shilling content and engaged.

There is little point in investing £1.5 billion in an ‘always on’ pipeline for munitions if you don’t have enough fingers on triggers.

In a competitive employment market, doing so will not be easy or a short-term conquest (not least because, as Major General (Retd) Dr Andrew Sharpe points out (pages 20-23), the Review “quietly asks for £6 billion of savings, now, before any new money goes in in a couple of years’ time”, which means that “soldiers can expect a couple of years of becoming even more ‘hollow’, before they start to feel any relief or revitalisation”.

Nevertheless, reversing the perceived ‘erosion of the Army offer’ and making it fit and appealing for the future workforce should be a priority. The provision of cutting-edge kit will be a key component of that (being nicknamed The Borrowers or Flintstones will be even less desirable than it was during the Gulf Wars should British soldiers find themselves on operations without any US troops to borrow from), but is one of only a myriad areas in need of investment. Factors such as the quality of roofs over heads, the food fuelling the stomachs on which the Army marches, the welfare support afforded to families, and career satisfaction have always mattered and can’t be neglected now or tomorrow in favour of military material. There is, after all, little point in investing £1.5 billion in an ‘always on’ pipeline for munitions if you don’t have enough fingers on triggers.

This, thankfully, is not news to most of the decision makers at Defence’s top table (as evidenced by the additional £1.5 billion committed to modernising military accommodation in the Review), nor indeed by those in positions of command, but every effort must be made to ensure that voices championing the people on which Defence success and national security depend are not lost amid the considerable buzz surrounding drones. The Chief of the General Staff gets it; here’s hoping those holding the Treasury’s purse strings do too. – Andrew Simms