Changing balance between UK reservists and regular troops

 
Soldiers of London's only territorial army infantry unit, take part in a live firing exercise in preparation for deployment to Afghanistan on September 17, 2009, in Appleby, England By 2020 the Territorial Army will form about 30% of a 120,000-strong army

Liam Fox, the defence secretary, has announced a, "significant investment" in the reserves that is intended to change the balance between them and regular troops.

By 2020, the aim is to produce a combined army strength of 120,000 with the reserves comprising 30% of that.

That sounds like good sense, yet the National Defence Association lobbying group has called today's news, "mind-bogglingly idiotic".

Patrick Mercer, Conservative MP and a former infantry battalion commander has adopted a more measured tone, but has criticised the government for doing this while troops are still so actively engaged in operations in Afghanistan.

The difference of views derives from the fact that while today emphasising new investments, the government's proposed cut to regular forces amounts to around 20% of the army, around 18,000 troops, and comes at a time when so many soldiers are still risking their lives on operations.

While many had hoped that changing the ratio of reserve to regular forces might be achieved by boosting the numbers and roles of the part timers, the same result will actually be achieved by cutting the regular army!

There are plans to invest £1.5bn in the reserves, but as this will take 10 years to happen, the actual investment of £150m each year seems small in overall defence terms.

Some of the grand designs for the reserves, for example sketched out in a previous paper by Lieutenant General Sir Graeme Lamb who was one of those who advised the defence secretary on today's announcement, cannot be done for this sum.

Balancing books

Lt Gen Lamb and others had pointed to the fact that some other countries like the US keep a large proportion of their capabilities for a major war in the reserves. What could be more logical, for example, than putting much of your 'heavy metal' - the tanks and self propelled artillery not needed in counter insurgency missions - in the reserves?

Start Quote

David Davis has opined that the UK is no longer a major military power and should stop pretending that it is”

End Quote

The UK though has not for decades made the kind of investment in reserve forces that would allow the creation of reserve tank regiments or squadrons of fighter planes. Countries like the US or Israel, by contrast do, and can gear up their military effort greatly in time of war as a result.

So today's announcement strikes many as using a moderate investment in the reserves (and some other equipment projects for regular forces) to distract form deep cuts elsewhere. While the defence secretary also itemised cuts to support services, it is clear that cutting the army's numbers substantially is one of the few ways that the Ministry of Defence can possibly balance its books.

Talking to a former general from the Rifles, he expresses concerns that his regiment, currently consisting of five regular and two reserve battalions, will see at least one regular battalion cut as the drawdown from Afghanistan begins.

In Sangin during 2009-10 two battalions from the Rifles suffered the sad distinction of suffering the highest casualties of any British units that have served in Helmand. It is the contrast between this hard service, and the expectation of further cuts that leaves so many in the army upset by current policies.

Dark rumours meanwhile swirl about Whitehall about the extent of further cuts that might be necessary to balance the MoD's programmes. There are references to a Royal Navy with only 12 frigates and destroyers or an RAF with just 80 combat aircraft.

It is little wonder that there is a great deal of emotion around. David Davis has opined that the UK is no longer a major military power and should stop pretending that it is. While another senior Tory, Bernard Jenkin, argued in a report published today that the UK has reached a, "tipping point" in terms of its world role.

 
Mark Urban, Diplomatic and defence editor, Newsnight Article written by Mark Urban Mark Urban Diplomatic and defence editor, BBC Newsnight

Ukraine crisis: Is this Cold War Two?

We overdo the talk of turning points and milestones in covering summits, but, when it comes to this G7 at The Hague, it's very hard to see it in any other terms, Newsnight's Mark Urban reports.

Read full article

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 14.

    Mark Urban's article is a very sensible and balanced commentary bar one improtant factor. As the Lybian campaign shows, we can no longer act as an independent military power and yet our strategic reviews continue to assume that we can act independently. So long as this continues we will be unable to make an efficient use of our resources becaise they will be spread too thinly to be effecrive

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 13.

    ~12:
    What an important point which can be the Achilles heel but is never emphasized. Anyone in reserves is a civilian. It's a whole different mentality.
    I recall some of my trainees at University when recalled to army are/were not reluctant to go but they're miserable. Going back to the grueling physical routine, different mindset, the whole nine yards: one said, like going from Earth to Mars.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 12.

    The physical demands of asymetric warfare on soldiers are huge - fitness is a major issue & it's taken a complete rethink to get it right - the "Campaign Form Fitness Plan" - which defines the level of fitness training to meet the ops cycle, but how can part time soldiers achieve the extremely high fitness level needed which has a huge time commitment over many months? & this affects ALL personnel

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 11.

    Just to give an idea how much muck, sorry *money*, does go into maintaining an army like US.
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/42494839/10_Companies_That_Make_Billions_From_The_U_S_Government?slide=1
    And no wonder, out of all those companies only one is British-based.
    Motto: Promote wars and then feed them.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 10.

    I was not aware when i posted my first comment that to pay for these changes the Army's FRES project is dead and buried.
    It looks like we will still be using 30 to 40 year old combat vehicles for another 10 to 15 years. In hidesight it would have better to have bought US Stryker LAV's off the shelf when we had the option.

 

Comments 5 of 14

 

Features

  • Two women in  JohanesburgYour pictures

    Readers' photos on the theme of South Africa


  • Worcestershire flagFlying the flag

    Preserving the identities of England's counties


  • Female model's bottom in leopard skin trousers as she walks up the catwalkBum deal

    Why budget buttock ops can be bad for your health


  • The OfficeIn pictures

    Fifty landmark shows from 50 years of BBC Two


  • French luxury Tea House, Mariage Freres display of tea pots Tea for tu

    France falls back in love with tea - but don't expect a British cuppa


BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.