Is Britain prepared for a major war? | Dominic Lawson
“Si vis pacem, para bellum; if you wish for peace, prepare for war.”
Rhyme Of History
Last November brought two highly significant dates for Britain’s military. The most significant was the largest increase in military funding since the end of the Cold War. The second, while symbolic, is no less important. Remembrance Sunday, which, of course commemorates the end of the First World War.
The fact that these two events have occured in the same month is no coincidence. Remembrance Sunday reminds us that peace is often a fragile enterprise and forces us to confront the disastrous consequences of becoming complacent about it. This is particularly important now because, to paraphrase the Prime Minister, the global security environment is now more unstable than it has been in decades.
He is not the only British, or Western official, to express similar concerns. During Remembrance weekend, the supreme commander of Britain’s armed forces, Sir Nick Carter, gave an interview in which he showed his foreboding that there were signs of a coming global conflict on the horizon. While refusing to speculate, he remarked that ‘history may not repeat but it often rhymes,’ implying that he sees similarities between the modern global order and environment which preceded the wars of the 20th century.
In 2019, a European Commision economist named Hardy Hanappi released a report meant for the eyes of Europe’s foreign policy elite in which he explicitly stated that a third world war was now highly likely. In the report, he argued that there are stark parallels between the globe today and the pre-war years. Among these similarities is a ramp up in global military expenditure, complex and widespread alliance networks, near continuous proxy conflicts in weak states, and the “disintegration” of global capitalism into distinct and neo-mercentalist blocs.
While it may appear alarmist to talk of a ‘third world war,’ the unfortunate truth is that we are overdue a large-scale inter-state conflict. The relative peace the world has known since the fall of the USSR is so rare in history that it is almost miraculous. Ofcourse, there have been conflicts in peripheral states which have sucked the UK in, such as the Yugoslav wars or the war on terror. While these have been disastrous for the people caught in the crossfire, none have come close to the destructive potential of a great power conflict.
Such conflicts occur at times when national elites calculate that global and regional orders are in a state of flux and that conflict, while risky, would allow them to reset the balance in a more favourable direction. Often called the ‘Thucydides Trap,’ history is replete with examples of revisionist powers seeking to use force to overcome the institutional constraints placed upon them by a status-quo power.
The re-emergence of revisionist powers is a common feature of history- and the modern world has witnessed the birth of a loose alliance of China, Russia, and Iran. Each of whom are united by a desire to reconstitute the global order via overwriting the rules in their respective neighbourhoods.
This is exactly the kind of environment that produces great power conflicts. Pentagon researchers agree and have explicitly stated that the American-led world order is “fraying” and we are entering into a new phase of multipolarity defined by overlapping regional powers.
Being aware of the possibility of the world’s powers stumbling into war, and that the globe is undergoing rapid technological changes which could leave the UK’s current military assets outdated, the question needs to be asked whether we are prepared for such a conflict- and whether the government has a clear sign of what our role would be within it.
Capabilities
The Prime Minister’s intentions for the new funding are a mixed bag for those concerned about Britain’s ability to fight a coming large scale war. Starting with the positives, the best announcement was Johnson’s intention to make the UK the premier naval power in Europe.
Despite being an island nation which relies upon open sea-lanes for our energy, successive governments have neglected the Royal Navy or subjected her to budget cuts which has left our naval force demoralised and facing a shortage of manpower. The era cannot end soon enough as we will likely see sea power become more important in the coming years. I have previously written how the UK will likely be forced to deploy the Royal Navy to an increasingly busy and militarised Arctic Circle which will drain resources heavily.
In this context, it is questionable how useful it is to have large and costly assets, such as the HMS Queen Elizabeth, deployed in the South China Sea. While supporters of the move argue that it demonstrates Britain’s global ambitions, it risks overstretch and that British defence planners should focus on concentrating our naval assets in the European theatre where they, coupled with rapidly modernising Polish armour and ground forces, can be used most effectively against a potential threat from Moscow.
The coming years will also have profound implications for our ground forces. For the past years, there has been considerable media outrage that the Army has consistently missed it’s targets for manpower, particularly in frontline infantry roles.
While increasing the number of troops in the army may be a good headline and a vote winner, it is questionable whether we actually need a large land army. Modern warfare no longer relies upon vast ranks and armoured columns. The conflicts of the future will require rapid deployment of small, agile forces. Restructuring the army and royal marines into forces which can be deployed on a global level but in relatively small quantities, supported by drones and allied satellite capabilities, should be the real priority.
The importance of conventional infantry numbers is waning.
Any size adjustment will also come with the development of new tactics and doctrine which takes account of the physical environment of the future. Demographers indicate that megacities and urban environments will soon be the home of the majority of the human race. Many of these will be Asian and African cities in which terrorist groups and criminal syndicates are able to thrive owing to poor local governance structures. British troops will need to be heavily trained in how to operate in the complex and tightly packed environments of these cities. This can be done by gleaning expertise from militaries such as the IDF which may be the world’s best urban fighting force owing to their multiple incursions into Gaza.
Multiple studies have demonstrated that so-called grey zone warfare will be a larger part of 21st century warfare. This is a catch all term which applies to the full spectrum of non-military influence tactics, ranging from cyber attacks to economic and ideological subversion. It is a concern because it extends beyond the military domain and into the civilian world. It has furthermore been proven effective by Russian Active Measures and Chinese ‘unrestricted warfare’.
The nature of such methods makes it one of the most secretive areas of inter-state competition and it is likely that the UK already has sophisticated means of targeting weaknesses in enemy societies. If not, then it would be wise to continue to grow the capability of units such as the 77th Brigade, the British Army’s information warfare division, and GCHQ.
While necessary, non-violent methods of war should not be seen as adequately papering over the weaknesses in our hard assets, however. No matter how many methods we have of weakening our rivals, future conflict will still be decided by hard power, and there are troubling signs that Britain is falling behind in key areas of the global arms race.
Take Hypersonic missiles as an example. These are rockets capable of travelling at five times the speed of sound, and are being developed by China and Russia. If successfully deployed, they could devastate British armour and naval assets within the opening hours of a conflict, causing immense loss of life and severely demoralising the British public, therefore hampering the government's ability to continue fighting.
Such a strategy appears to be what Moscow, Beijing, or even Tehran, would follow. Aware that they would not be able to fight a war of attrition, these governments would seek to maximise loss of life by targeting prize assets with cheaply produced missiles.
As of yet, the UK only has a limited hypersonic development program, and inadequate means of defending against them. The announcement of RAF Space Command which will prioritise research into rocket technology is welcome as we will increasingly see low-orbit space based assets play a role in future conflicts, and the need to bring down the communication satellites of opponents’ militaries, or intercept weapons aimed at ours will likely require some form of hypersonic arsenal.
Britain’s Role
Overall, there is a deeper, more fundamental question which needs to be asked when we consider defence. Simply, what is Britain’s role to be in global security, or a coming great power war?
Our leaders seem unsure of how best to answer this question and how we should distribute Britain’s considerable military might. Much of this depends upon what we believe the next conflict will look like. The report by Hannapi presented several scenarios which are worth considering. The first outlines a “classic” form of great power war which plays out in a region where two hegemonies clash.
In this case, we need to ask, is involving ourselves in the regional squabbles of other countries really in the UK’s interest? Take a very plausible scenario, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan. Would it be in the interests of this country to see the Royal Marines wading ashore to combat the troops of the PLA in their own backyard? Would the British public even tolerate watching young men and women die for a country on the other side of the globe? What would happen if the Chinese sank one of our major carriers with their cheaply produced missiles? Watching a 3 billion pound vessel named after our head of state being annihilated could constitute the biggest military humiliation for this country in centuries.
Another scenario, which is also likely, can be referred to as the ‘small wars’ scenario. Multiple interlinking civil wars, in a chain of weak states in Europe’s periphery. If a perfect storm, such as that witnessed in 2011, produced another Arab Spring, we could see widespread disorder throughout the Middle East and North Africa- bringing with it all the mass movement, terrorism, and disorder that destabilised Europe previously.
Developments in periphery states may have substantial strategic consequences for Britain; fighting foreign proxy conflicts, however, are likely to lack public legitimacy.
Even in such a scenario, it is questionable whether we are equipped to respond effectively. Our previous interventions in failed states have thus far been disastrous and have produced a reasonable scepticism towards foreign deployment and regime change, especially in the Muslim world.
The next global conflict is likely to be a mix of both of these scenarios and could prelude each other. If the West became focused heavily on the Middle East, or a failed state in South America, such as Venezuela, it is likely that China would take that opportunity to cross the Strait of Taiwan, or Russia to push her advantage in Baltics. In such a scenario, the UK risks being completely outmaneuvered if our leaders cannot decide upon our place.
Ultimately, we cannot be sure whether such a scenario will present itself, and indeed, we can hope it never does. But hope will not help us prepare. And the lesson from the two great wars that our country has endured is that hope is often insufficient for when the disaster of great power conflict strikes. While last November and the passing of Remembrance Day may be fading from our memories now both Christmas and the New Year have come and gone, and all attention is being given to the potentiality for widespread vaccine distribution, we would be wise to remember those that died and prepare ourselves best for when it happens again.
–
If you liked this article and want to help our organisation expand, please consider donating. Every little helps.
