For Peace, Prepare For War
General Sir Peter Wall says the British Army is taken for granted — and needs investment
By For Peace, Prepare For War
October 7 2024
Defence of the realm is lurching back onto the political agenda. In the face of the conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, the British public seems to be recognising that we cannot take our security for granted. There’s not yet any more money for defence; in the recent Budget, ‘tax cuts’ have taken priority and our expenditure remains around the NATO minimum of 2% of GDP (provided we include pensions and VAT!). This isn’t enough to sustain competent armed forces that can contribute to Western security in the way that the UK has sought to do since 1945. The armed forces have slipped down Government’s agenda and fallen in the national consciousness in recent years, perhaps because very few people are directly involved with them nowadays. They have ceased to be a central component of national life, which makes it easy to ignore them politically. As a case in point, the British Army has its place in our folklore, but many people wouldn’t see it as key to our future. It’s at its smallest for 200 years and seems more remote than ever from the rest of society. A profession of arms and military ethos that champions physical and psychological resilience, camaraderie, selflessness, and fighting spirit doesn’t chime with current social mores. For many, the British Army is seen as a vestige of a national history that it’s fashionable to cancel. It conjures thoughts of It Ain’t Half Hot, Mum colonial attitudes in faraway corners of the Empire; Blackadder impressions of the Great War with its simplistic ‘lions lead by donkeys’ accusations of pointlessness; and the finest hours of World War II, under Churchill’s truly phenomenal leadership, now discredited by liberal progressives on the left of this country.
Yet, today’s soldiers still take inspiration from studying the WWII campaigns in the Western Desert, the jungles of Burma, and the Normandy beaches, as the last of the generation that fought in them so courageously and stoically are finally passing on. They revere the soldiers who fought and died for the cause to establish right over wrong and create the foundations of the world order we have today. Victory wasn’t a foregone conclusion, for the human and resource costs were immense and the Allies were running out of time, manpower, and equipment by 1945. Post-war supranational institutions that exist today, such as NATO and what is now the EU, were set up expressly to ensure such aggression would not happen again, not least within Europe. But here we go again. Although, in the round, the 20th century proved to be the most violent in world history, after 1945 the Cold War brought an uneasy peace, with the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact armies posturing very large forces on NATO’s borders. For example, the Army’s 1st (British) Corps on the North German Plain faced the Soviet 3rd Shock Army across the border in East Germany; styled to convey menace they certainly had our attention, but they folded in the face of NATO’s superior investment in capability, without a shot being fired. Through that emphatic deterrence the West prevailed, albeit at a cost of 5% of GDP on defence for several decades. This was a truly grand strategic achievement.
The ensuing collapse of the Soviet Union spawned significant Western disarmament and the ‘peace dividend’. The deterrent philosophy that brought it about has unfortunately given way to complacency, apathy, and a loss of national mojo. Defence funding was diverted towards social needs, creating a dependency that is now difficult to manage. All three of our armed services have suffered from protracted underinvestment and shrinkage that have accelerated under the current government. That peace dividend has ironically increased the risk of conflict, and the Ukraine war is evidence of that. Two years into the Russian ‘special operation’, it’s hard to envisage a Ukraine victory, and lack of Western support is a key factor. What of the British Army now? It retains the core attributes of an excellent fighting force. It has very fine leaders, trained at Sandhurst, one of the top military academies in the world, to which 35 foreign nations also send their very best officer candidates. The Army’s soldiers are recruited from the best of British youth, bringing their renowned savvy, fighting spirit, humour, and belligerence in adversity. It’s a ‘reference army’ — one that other nations of comparable size regard as a benchmark and are inclined to emulate. It’s also a volunteer army, and what matters is the spirit and military capability to deter and defeat our potential opponents, coupled with the political will to use it. As General Sir Patrick Sanders, Chief of the General Staff, said recently, a citizen army may be in prospect if we want to defend our national interests against growing threats and there aren’t enough volunteers to do it. Perhaps not so much a ‘call to arms’ as a ‘wake-up call’ to snap us out of complacency before it’s too late. The Army has a historic lineage, conveyed through its much-admired ‘regimental system’ that instils the imperative and responsibility to succeed, whatever the situation, whatever the odds. No regiment gets up in the morning on operations without knowing what is expected and that its forebears have been here before — all-too-often literally! So, duty calls.
I was privileged to witness the sustained courage of British patrols going out daily for six months into the Helmand countryside in Afghanistan and facing significant threats, despite the very sobering tally of casualties. That is the very assured resolve and quality of the British soldier. The pinnacle of our Army’s soldiering capability is manifest in our special forces, not least the Special Air Service (SAS), formed in WWII by the Scottish laird, David Stirling. Although very few military organisations can hold a candle to them, we don’t know much about the SAS because of secrecy and their humility. They are, nonetheless, the envy of the world. They are also a key indicator of the underpinning health of the Army’s spirit and ethos, which we should celebrate. But that, of course, is not the full story.
A sustained injection of capital is required to arrest the decline in combat capability of the Army and capitalise on its excellent fundamentals. These investments are largely in the physical aspects of fighting power; for the leadership, the culture, the people, and the operational acuity of the Army are very well grounded. Battle-winning equipment such as drones, tanks, infantry fighting vehicles, air defence, and helicopters are not sufficient and they take us a long time to acquire, so we had better start now. There is a sense in ministerial circles that we only have armour for nostalgia, to fight the last war; conversely, as the US Army chief said recently, “You only need tanks if you want to win!” Ammunition production is on a peacetime footing, so we cannot respond to fast-changing needs, which is a key national and alliance vulnerability, as is the low stock of spare parts to repair damaged equipment. Investing billions of pounds on materiel is not politically sexy, but it is essential if we care about our ability to deter and, when necessary, defeat those inclined to threaten us. Alas, for now at least, other areas of government investment remain a higher priority than security. I am conscious that the Royal Navy and the Royal Air Force, which play equally essential roles in UK defence, also have their challenges. All three services are constrained in their ability to represent their predicament honestly to the nation, which perpetuates the complacency about our ability to defend our national interests. Rest assured that the Army will not lack for determination, persistence, flair, and will to fight in its next engagements. It will, however, need a larger force, with a major injection of combat equipment and logistic capability, if its soldiers are not to be betrayed through our laissez-faire attitudes since the West last had its foot on Russia’s throat. To maintain peace we must prepare for war.
