glyn

Britain spends less of its wealth on defence than Bulgaria, Greece and Turkey despite the constant demands placed on its Armed Forces, official figures show.
According to the Conservatives, defence spending as a proportion of the UK's gross domestic product is at its lowest since 1930, before the UK recognised the rising threat of Nazi Germany.

Cost-cutting imposed by the Ministry of Defence is now threatening the Navy's warship-building programme and leading to unprecedented levels of disaffection among senior serving and recently retired officers.
Des Browne, the Defence Secretary, will be challenged in the Commons today over reports of further cutbacks in the programme for new Type 45 destroyers and growing doubts on whether the Government will fulfil its promise to build two new aircraft carriers.
Julian Lewis, a Conservative defence spokesman, said last night that the Royal Navy was "bloodied, battered and on the ropes", with a "palpable feeling of betrayal" at the top as a result of a catalogue of cuts
Ministers have ordered defence chiefs to stop the leaks about equipment shortages and cutbacks to front line capability which are hitting morale. The leaks have also infuriated the Chancellor Gordon Brown, who is being blamed for the squeeze as he prepares to take over as Prime Minister.
advertisement

Figures from Nato show that Britain lags behind the United States and France as well as smaller countries such as Greece, Bulgaria and Turkey in the share of national wealth it spends on defence.
Liam Fox, the shadow defence secretary, said: "To drop to this level of our national wealth seems absolutely crazy. We have a smaller navy than the French and our ships are being mothballed. What a triumph for new Labour."
Government figures show that 2.5 per cent of the UK's GDP — or around £32 billion — was likely to be spent on defence in 2005/6 compared with 4.4 per cent in 1987/88.
The MoD has been forced to borrow from private companies through the Private Finance Initiative to ensure that the Armed Forces are prepared for the 21st century.
Despite the apparent lower level of spending, the Government has presided over a big increase in operational commitments since coming to power in 1997: Operation Desert Fox aimed at destroying Saddam Hussein's capability to produce weapons of mass destruction (1998), Kosovo (1999 ongoing), Sierra Leone (2000 ongoing), Afghanistan (2001 ongoing) and Operation Telic in Iraq (2003 ongoing).
Figures obtained by the Conservatives show that troop numbers have fallen from 101,360 full-time personnel in 1997 to 99,460 in 2007 while the Royal Air Force has seen offensive squadrons fall from 16 to 11, and the Navy has lost eight destroyers and six frigates. Soldiers' leave and training has also been squeezed.
Last November the government spending watchdog, the National Audit Office, said the Armed Forces were 5,170 below a total strength of 180,690 and since 2001 have operated at or above predicted deployment levels.
The MoD agreed operating at this level meant "additional strains" on staff, but denied forces were overstretched.
The NAO report found that, for the past five years, they had "consistently operated at or above the most demanding combination of operations envisaged" by defence planners.
Criticism of "overstretch" among the Armed Forces has been voiced by senior figures in the military.
A report drawn up for General Sir Richard Dannatt, the Chief of the General Staff when he was commander in chief of Land Command last August, warned that unprecedented pressure on the Army was forcing it to make cuts leading to "severe impediment to the delivery of operational capability".
The Government insisted that the defence budget had increased in real terms since 2000, while £1.4 billion has been set aside to cover the costs of deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan
A spokesman said: "Although the defence budget has declined as a proportion of GDP since the height of the Cold War, the defence budget has actually been increasing in real terms and it is simply that GDP has risen more quickly.
"We currently have no plans to cut the numbers of destroyers and frigates. However the MoD routinely reviews all defence capabilities to ensure

__________________
Semper in excretum. Solum profunda variat.

T_igger_cs_30

__________________
FEAR NAUGHT

I don't work here ...I am an analyst!

Ray

Want to know more?

Take a look at the ARRSE!

__________________


"Some have learnt many Tricks of sly Evasion, Instead of Truth they use Equivocation, And eke it out with mental Reservation, Which is to good Men an Abomination."

I don't have to attend every argument I'm invited to.

HAKUNA MATATA

PubFather

Figures are problematical - and can be spun in a number of ways. For eg, the absolute total of £32 bn, puts Britain as the nation with the second highest defense spending in the world. Britain spends more as a % on defense than Germany, Italy, Spain or Japan....

I personally consider the 2.5% to be perfectly adequate in peace-time - sadly, we are not in peace time, and 3-4% is more realistic given our commitments at the current time.

The other real issue is value for money. Why is it that UK equipment is generally far more expensive and much less capable that its US equivalent? Even when you factor in US economies of scale and R&D budgets, the disparity reeks of exceptionally poor project management by the MoD.

Another problem is a fixation by certainly the RAF (and possibly the RN and Army too) on expensive "toys", to paraphrase a former CiGS. We need high end, uber-sophisticated gear. We need to balance it with some low-end, cheap and cheerful stuff for low intensity/COIN operations. Typhoon is not a COIN a/craft... not at £62 mil a pop!

__________________
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit - Scottish Motto

"They that approve a private opinion, call it opinion; but they that dislike it, heresy; and yet heresy signifies no more than private opinion” Thomas Hobbes - Leviathan

Boltonian

Their figures are wrong.

Britain spends 2.5% of its GDP on defence whereas France only spends 1.9% and Germany only 1.3%.

A THIRD of all total EU defence spending is spent by Britain.


World's biggest defence spenders

1) United States - 522,000,000,000
2) China - 70,480,000,000
3) Britain - 66,388,574,400
4) France - 45,000,000,000 (also includes the Gendarmerie)
5) Japan - 44,310,000,000
6) Germany - 34,100,000,000
7) Italy - 28,182,800,000

wikipedia.org

glyn

AchtungSpitFire

Its a little island off north wester europe. Who cares what they do, they're completely irrelevant outside US/UN led operations.

__________________
http://www.christiancs.com/files/J2/bear2.gif

glyn

Archer

The UK may be a small island or collection of islands + other territories, and its role may be in doubt with the rise of Asia, but it is still one of the worlds leading economic powers, with a significant portion of trade, financial instruments handled by british firms, BAe & other firms are still amongst the leading defence firms in the world, its got the trappings of power- UN SC seat, G-8 which makes it weild power, its currently in Iraq and Afghanistan....

...so the UK is hardly irrelevant!

__________________
Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu

My bow is stretched for its task

Officer of Engineers

Only when it comes to cricket.

__________________
Chimo

Ray

I am sure they will spring back.

After all, they invented cricket and so should know it best!

Parihaka

They invented Netball, Rugby and had a hand in Soccer too Ray, and they're crap at them as well

Ray

Parihaka,

You are being a little too unkind, even if frank and in consonance with the facts.

They are not that bad. It is just that they are going through a lean period!

Parihaka

Only a little.

Mind you, when Aus posted 344 against us I thought our goose was cooked as well, but damn me if the boys didn't get within eight of it!

Archer

I have given up watching cricket Col, after seeing the travails of the Indian cricket team! I shudder to think what would happen if the US and the PRC picked up cricket as a "competitive sport"...then India would end up sticking to only kabaddi and kho kho with our neighbours such as Bangladesh and Pakistan. Perhaps we might be able to get Sri Lanka into it too.