Sharkey Ward has warned about it. I've argued about it over at Think Defense. Now we have this from Defense News...looks like we've seen all this before...
Prime minister Margaret Thatcher was warned about the risks in slashing Britain's navy, a year before the 1982 Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands, secret files released Dec. 30 showed.Read the whole article but consider this.
Her foreign secretary Lord Peter Carrington also warned defense secretary John Nott that axing Britain's Antarctic patrol ship would send all the wrong signals about London's willingness to defend the Falklands.
Documents released after 30 years locked away in Britain's National Archives showed that the head of the Royal Navy was fuming in 1981 about planned defense cuts.
First sea lord Adm. Henry Leach, who later told Thatcher that Britain could and should send a naval task force to retake the Falklands following the April 1982 invasion, was furious with her a year earlier over her "unbalanced devastation" of the armed forces.
"I note with regret but understanding that the tightness of your program precludes your seeing me personally as requested," he wrote in a stinging note to the premier.
"I am confident however that you will at least spare two minutes to read this note from the professional head of the navy before you and your Cabinet colleagues consider a proposition substantially to dismantle that navy."
The dynamics between the services is almost exactly the same on both sides of the Atlantic.
The Royal Navy has been savaged by budget cuts and by despicable behavior on the part of the leadership of the Royal Air Force.
Now this glimpse into a not too distant history reveals a couple of things....the Royal Navy has been here before...the Falklands War was not an "easy" victory...and the British government has not learned the lessons from the Thatcher Administration.
The only difference, and it is an important one, is that the RAF can base Typhoons and Tornados on the Falklands themselves.
ReplyDeleteThis certainly does not replace a carrier force but it makes a significant difference. Should tensions continue to climb Britain does have the choice to significantly increase its air strike capability without needing to deploy carriers it doesn't have.
Whether it has the will to do so is another question entirely.
see, i dont get the hatred of the raf.
ReplyDeleteOf the three services, it has the smallest budget, and has suffered the most extreme cuts recently.
Down from 4 'fighting' aircraft to 2, and shortly, 1, in a decade (i think jaguar lasted that long).
The army remains the biggest budget hog...