Defence

Friday

David Blackburn

Brown’s Afghanistan speech was encouraging, but the strategy’s still flawed

Brown’s delivery may have been beyond sepulchral, but the content was encouraging. He laid out how Afghan stability is being bolstered by the increased activity and competence of Afghan security forces, the replacement of the heroin crop with wheat, an intensification of government in rural hinterlands and by arresting urban corruption. At least there now seems to be a degree of co-ordination between coalition and Afghan security operations, civic reconstruction and the administration of government. These are welcome changes but there is still no overarching sense of what the ‘Afghan mission’ hopes to achieve, beyond the dubious contention that it will make the West safer. As a result, a number

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Lib Dems moving towards advocating withdrawal from Afghanistan

Nick Clegg’s statement today on Afghanistan strongly suggests to me that by the time of the next election the Lib Dems will be for withdrawal from Afghanistan. Clegg told the BBC that: “I think there’s a tipping point where we have to ask ourselves whether we can do this job properly, and if we can’t do it properly we shouldn’t do it at all. I don’t think we are there yet,” he said. Clegg’s use of the word yet seems to be a definite hint that he is moving towards advocating withdrawal. In crude political terms, this would make a lot of sense for the Lib Dems. It would give

Daniel Korski

Why Britain needs to stay in Afghanistan

With the resignation of Eric Joyce as PPS to the Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth, the question of why Britain is part of the NATO-led Afghan mission has taken on new force. No doubt the Prime Minister will explain what he sees as the reasons when he speaks at IISS later today. But just because Gordon Brown supports a policy does not make it wrong. Here are the reasons why we should remain engaged: 1. To deny Al Qaeda a safe-haven from which to train and organise attacks on the West. Though terrorism can be organized in Oldham, Hamburg and Marseilles, Al Qaeda still believes it needs safe-havens in places like

Thursday

James Forsyth

Eric Joyce resigns as PPS to the Defence Secretary

In a move that is sure to overshadow the Prime Minister’s speech on Afghanistan tomorrow, Eric Joyce, a former army office, has tonight resigned as PPS to the Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth. In his resignation letter, published on the Channel 4 website, Joyce says that the public would “appreciate more direct approach by politicians” to the Afghanistan question and that the public will not “accept for much longer that our losses can be justified by simply referring to the risk of greater terrorism on our streets.” Joyce also states that there must be a run off in the Afghan election if public support for the deployment there is to be

Tuesday

James Forsyth

Following a strike, would Iran close the Straits of Hormuz?

In most discussions about what would happen following a strike on Iran it is taken as a given that the Iranians would close the Straits of Hormuz, through which 90 percent of Persian Gulf oil exports pass. The thinking goes that this would lead to a huge spike in world oil prices. But an interesting article in the new issue of Foreign Policy argues that it would be far harder for Iran to close the Straits than is commonly assumed. It points out that oil tankers can travel through 20 miles of the Straits rather than just the 4 mile official channel, that oil tankers are actually not that vulnerable

Daniel Korski

Commemorating the victims and the survivors

Seventy years ago today, and only a week after the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact had been signed, a Nazi German battleship opened fire on a Polish fort on the Westerplatte peninsula outside Gdansk and began the Second World War. For my family living in Poland, the onslaught of war would change everything. Henrik and Karolina Finkel, having seen their parents and siblings wiped out not long after the German invasion, disguised themselves as Catholics and lived a make-belief life outside the Warsaw Ghetto. Henrik, an inventive man who was born in Vienna and originally named Heinrich (his brother was, believe it or not, called Adolph), changed the family surname from Finkel to

Monday

David Blackburn

But he did for the both of them with his plan of attack

The tension between defence ministers and senior officers has been a running story throughout the summer, perhaps at the expense of the opinions of troops on the ground. The Times’ war correspondent, Anthony Loyd, wrote a piece today describing soldiers’ views in the wake of the Prime Minister’s visit: ‘One can only hope that if Mr Brown had braved the journey northwards from Bastion to Sangin (he didn’t), where British infantrymen are getting killed or wounded at a rate directly comparable to that of their predecessors in Western Europe in 1944, his media men would have first whitewashed the graffiti in the latrine third from the left on the northern wall. ‘“I

Sunday

David Blackburn

Negotiating with the Taliban is fantasy

Lots of photo opportunities for the Prime Minister in Afghanistan, looking almost louche in shirt-sleeves and tie, but he’s attempted to provide some much needed direction for the Afghan mission. Last month, David Miliband said that Nato must talk to the Taliban and the Guardian reports that Brown is considering reconciliation also. Here are the details: ‘A source close to Brown suggested negotiations with insurgents sympathetic to the Taliban, persuading them to switch sides, now formed a key component of Britain’s war effort. He added: “The more reconciliation, the better.” Diplomatic sources in Helmand suggested such efforts could be on a large scale: “A large part of the Taliban are

Thursday

David Blackburn

The case for naval investment

Over at ConHome, Tim Montgomerie debates Will Inboden’s review of the main themes of the Tories foreign policy. I urge CoffeeHousers to read both articles, but the section on the relationship between energy and defence struck me particularly, recalling Liam Fox’s 2006 Chatham House speech on the subject. Here’s the premise of Fox’s argument: “We are all competing for the same natural resources to feed the economic system. The potential for terrorists or even nation states to interrupt this supply to cause widespread – rather than just local – disruption increases enormously.” Fox pointed out that global energy competition requirements had evolved beyond Britain’s defence strategies and capabilities. Nowhere was

Sunday

David Blackburn

Thank God they’re not running a war

Last week, defence maestro Kevan Jones launched his master-strategy to smear General Sir Richard Dannatt. It was ingenious. An FOI request would reveal the General to be a spendthrift, abusing taxpayers’ generosity by lavishing their money on his grace and favour accommodation and on raucous parties for his army mates. To borrow a phrase, there was just one small flaw in the plan: it was rubbish. The Mail reveals that General Dannatt’s grace and favour apartment is a stable block, not a palace, and that he pays tax on it because he views it as a perk. His other claims are modest. Audiciously, Sir Richard secured £19,270.77p in expenses between 2005

Wednesday

Alex Massie

Richard Dannatt is “playing politics” too

General Richard Dannatt may well be correct to demand additional men and equipment for the Afghan campaign and the military has certainly been ill-served by this government (though not only by this most recent ministry). But when the accusation of “playing politics” is thrown around let’s not forget that the good General is perfectly adept at playing that game himself. Perhaps it really is the case that he can only tour Afghanistan in an American helicopter. Perhaps it is even “self-evidently” the case that he’s only using a US chopper because there aren’t any British ones. As I say, this could all be true but it is also most convenient

Alex Massie Alex Massie

Adventures in Defence Procurement. Plus, Do We Need the RAF?

Defence procurement is difficult. It’s hard to design and build new weapons systems and predicting what kinds of equipment and force structure will be needed in 20 years time is a necessarily tricky business. Mistakes and blunders don’t just happen; they’re inevitable. Still, despite the Eurofighter and the looming problems with the Royal Navy’s new carrier class, it’s not clear that there’s anything on the MoD’s books quite so daft as the US Air Force’s F-22 fighter*. It’s not merely a matter of cost – though as nearly $200m a pop the F-22 is no bargain – but that, apparently, the average F-22 only flies for 1.7 hours before developing

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

Public in favour of ringfencing defence spending

A timely poll from PoliticsHome which finds that two-thirds of the public think defence should be protected from any spending cuts.  Here’s their graphic with full results: The question, of course, is whether this kind of public pressure forces any of the main parties to actually shield defence from cuts.  With the debt burden as it is, its difficult to see them doing so while also sticking to their current commitments in other areas. UPDATE: Ok, just to provide a bit of context in the wake of some thought-provoking comments from CoffeeHousers below.  Yes, there could well be two extraneous factors at play here: a) the prominence of Afghanistan in

Daniel Korski

Time for a British Manley Commission?

If the government wants to stem the haemorrhaging of elite support for NATO’s Afghan mission, there is one major thing it can do at this stage: establish a British version of the Manley Commission. In Canada, ex-Deputy Prime Minister John Manley was asked by the Harper government to take a hard look at Canada’s role is Afghansistan, and lay out a clear plan. Its work effectively rebuilt Canadian support for the war effort. The Brown Government is simply not trusted to give an honest assessment of what is happening on the ground or give the military what it needs. The Defence Secretary is an unknown entity outside of Westminster (and

Peter Hoskin

Defending his own premiership

The Times’s story of how Bob Ainsworth came to be Defence Secretary is equal parts extraordinary and disheartening.  Here are the key passages: “Mr Ainsworth’s predecessor, John Hutton, had indicated to Mr Brown in mid-May that he was thinking of leaving the Government. Mr Hutton, recently remarried, had a compelling family reason for wanting to step down. But Mr Brown, preoccupied with the elections and the possibility of a leadership challenge, appears to have spent little time thinking about the vacancy. It wasn’t until around noon the day after the polls that he began to focus on who should oversee Britain’s military and its engagement in Afghanistan. In the midst

Monday

Peter Hoskin

What did Mitchell mean?

Andrew Mitchell is doing the media rounds to discuss the Tories’ new policy paper on international development, and he seemed to let slip with a major claim on defence spending to the BBC earlier.  Here’s how the indispensable PoliticsHome reports it: “Mr Mitchell said that it was not a question of choosing between the budgets for defence and international development, adding that the two departments would work much more closely under a Conservative government. ‘I don’t think that defence will face cuts, but it’s not a question of either or, you have to do both,” he said. ‘The development effort in Afghanistan which hasn’t always gone well and so to

Sunday

Daniel Korski

The UK “surge” debate

The support for Britain’s involvement in Afghanistan is, for the first time, showing major signs of fraying. Nick Clegg broke ranks with the other party leaders last week, and this weekend the total number of British deaths went beyond the number of soldiers killed in Iraq. Understandably, the Sunday papers are filled with stories about the lack of troops and kit. The Observer reports that an emergency review is taking place in the MoD to see if more soldiers need to be sent out. So what to make of it all? First of all, it is clear that there were too few troops and civilians deployed to start off. I

Peter Hoskin

So who’s really “playing politics” over troop numbers?

Just when you thought Brown’s government couldn’t sink any lower, you go and read the Sunday Times’s lead story today and the comments it contains from “senior Labour figures”, including a minister.  Here are the first few paragraphs: “Senior Labour figures accused the head of the army last night of playing politics as he said that there were too few troops and helicopters in the Afghan war zone. One minister expressed fury that General Sir Richard Dannatt, the chief of the general staff, had attended a private dinner with Tory MPs and suggested an extra 2,000 troops were needed in Helmand province. The general’s remarks put him at odds with

Friday

Daniel Korski

National security priorities: your say

Watch out: it’s security review season. The Brown government is about to issue a second version of its National Security Strategy. You can expect Pauline Neville-Jones to put out a revised version of the paper she did for the Tories a while ago. The Obama administration is set to launch a new “Quadrennial Diplomacy and Development Review,” to be headed up by Deputy Secretary of State Jacob “Jack” Lew and Policy Planning chief Anne-Marie Slaughter. While NATO has just begun work on its Strategic Concept, and Russia recently updated its National Security Strategy. Oh, and the EU disseminated a new Security Strategy under the French EU Presidency, which also saw

Daniel Korski

The Lib Dems threaten to go AWOL 

Though Nick Clegg has greater pre-existing international experience than either David Cameron or Gordon Brown (having worked in Brussels), he cannot help but see international affairs through a narrow political lens. Last year it was Israel’s targetting of Hamas, now it is Nato’s Afghan mission. Clegg wants the British troop contribution to ISAF either massively expanded or for the boys to come home. Simple enough. But it is also a sign that the Lib Dems, despite having such foreign policy luminaries like Ming Campbell on their benches, lack depth. It would be great for the number of British troop in Helmand to be expanded. But with almost 9000 troops already