Military of China, force comment.
Military of China, force comment.

HMS “Ark Royal” aircraft will be retired during the year

○ newspaper freelance writer Gui-Yu “Youth Reference” (May 27, 2011 Version 19)

the British army has a glorious history, it has dominated the world’s continents and oceans, gave birth to Nelson, Wellington, Montgomery and some other star. However, in recent years, due to a substantial reduction of the government in response to a record budget deficit, the British military is shrinking at an unprecedented rate, the outside world have commented that, when the “sun” empire is now the “sunset” .

“full” combat thing of the past

in the U.S. “The Wall Street Journal” interview, a former Royal Air Force Chief of Staff Michael Graydon recalled that in 1991, when he was in command of the Iraqi no-fly action, men have more than 20 squadrons of fighters to send them to today’s Libya, the British Royal Air Force to perform the same task, but six of the squadron. Responsible for the evacuation of the Royal Navy from Libya, “Cumberland” frigate will be retired in June, as the vanguard of the air “Tornado” fighter’s career will end early. The only good news is that there are two reconnaissance aircraft was rescued from the edge of retiring back, adding to the ranks against Gaddafi.

today’s British, is experiencing the most painful since World War II austerity. Last October, Prime Minister Cameron announced in the next four years to cut 8% of the national defense budget plan, details include: retired “Harrier” type of VTOL aircraft and the “Nimrod” type of maritime patrol aircraft; by 40 tanks and heavy artillery %; “Ark Royal” aircraft carrier will be discarded, and the other one a helicopter platform, the British aircraft carrier in the next 10 years no strike capability.

cut with the appropriate equipment, the British armed forces will be layoffs, cuts 7,000 Army, Royal Navy and the Air Force decreased by 5,000, Headquarters Command authorities will also be cut in 2015, 25,000 civilian staff. March 1 this year, the British Ministry of Defense announced layoffs of more detailed blueprint, put forward by 2015, cutting a total of 17,000 armed forces jobs, including the reduction of 1.1 million people and “natural wastage” 6000 (where the natural wastage , is retired in the maintenance of normal conditions, and reduce the size of the scale of recruitment). 17000 posts total number of posts about the existing armed forces of 10%.

5 mid-May, the parliamentary Defense Committee held a hearing, the British armed forces officers acknowledged, through layoffs, the British will no longer be a “full range” of the armed forces, That is, it no longer as before, both suppression of riots in response to such low-intensity combat, but also to participate in large-scale war between countries. Air Force Chief of Staff Marshal Dalton with the words, in Afghanistan and Libya, while fighting for the British under tremendous pressure, “in this case, can not do any other thing.” Government is that, despite the scale of force shrink, resulting in the use of the military government on the “more to be carefully chosen,” but it does not undermine the ability of the United Kingdom support allies, after all, it still has the world’s fourth-largest military budget.

old partner for the Pentagon worried about

the moment, a wide range of geo-political forces reshaping the global military balance. Although the United States to cut military spending, still the world’s first strong. NATO’s other members to suffer from budget constraints, but Russia and the Middle East are still wary.

In this situation, the UK attracted a large number of disarmament and even the attention of Washington, who worry that one day will lose the most reliable ally. For European and NATO policy, U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense, said Townsend, Britain should strive to maintain the ability to respond to widespread crisis, do not cut the army to only one or two tasks to cope with the extent of – “No matter what the future face of the situation We hope the British as it was before, always able to reach the battlefield on the first day. “Britons own assessment report predicts that in future military operations, the United Kingdom only to send 30,000 soldiers overseas, and in the” limited period of time “; in 2003, the US-led war in Iraq, the British sent 4.6 million people.

at the Pentagon last month’s meeting, U.S. officials clearly told the London-based counterparts, if they want to maintain their deterrent, it is now the bottom of the curve, must not continue the disarmament. In this regard, a number of years worked in the senior British commander in the deeply felt, the former commander of the armed forces in the search Ersigusi said: “If the cuts continue, we as a military power in the second group leader position would be threatened, we are in the tipping point. “Some European officials are worried that the British as the most powerful army in Europe, if constantly being weakened, will inevitably lead to the global military balance in Europe is not conducive towards the direction of tilt, Libya’s military action proves that Europe is heavily dependent on the United States.

if war come again … …

as the former world’s military hegemon, Britain gave its allies to respect and trust, which is also a deadly enemy. After World War II, the United States and the Soviet Union (Russian) military strength over the UK, but the British desire to participate in international operations and ability to make this country still maintains strong diplomatic influence. Former British Foreign Secretary Hurd said that once the UK has always been willing to use the military to strengthen cooperation with the United States and other European countries, relations, to obtain a more powerful political voice, such as membership in NATO on the issue. The war in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States regarded the British as the most reliable, most capable military partner.

matter how brilliant the past, poor financial situation forced the British government had to bow to reality, police layoffs, to cut welfare spending, but also reduced the number of civil servants … … Fox mentioned defense minister, defense Department before being too extravagant in spending money, plus the accumulated deficit of the previous government, which after all can not be immune.

The question now is, the number of troops in the defense budget and cut the larger environment, the revival of British troops there opportunities? In fact, it’s performance in Iraq and Afghanistan, has been criticized by many as it can not very well perform the task, largely because of lack of resources. If further reduce the number of personnel and equipment procurement in the future international operations, the British performance is bound to further decline, more troops will undoubtedly tarnished. People can not help wondering if, as between 1982 and Argentina “Falklands War” like the recurrence of conflict, the United Kingdom’s chances of winning much is left?