SDSR - Can the Min Def and Joint Chiefs just say no!?
Rarely do I initiate a post, but......
Am I being thick here? If HMT (Mr Osborne) has decided that the MoD has all of sudden got to pay for Trident due to cost, then cannot the military just say 'no' to supporting Afghanistan due to cost.
Why don't the Joint Chiefs just offer their resignations as even I can see that this is just too far and with that poor level of funding then nothing can be achieved in the future - even with the best non-miliatry civili servant slashing costs to appease his/her treasury masters.
Is the British public truly aware of exactlywhat the implications are of this Defence review? Not one person involved in this 'review' believes that it is policy driven, but merely a method to reduce costs.
What I find slightly unnerving is that the Treasury is about to decimate (on a long term basis) an already overstretched and underfunded MoD under the belief of cost cutting, when actually the city (Goldman Sachs) believes that the UK economy will grow quicker than both the US and Eurozone.
History as shown that the economy can and will turn around quickly, but an experienced, trained and well resourced military force will take significantly longer. We are certainly not in a stable and peaceful phase in world history, so I do not see any 'peace dividends' that can truly deliver real savings.
When the SDSR axe falls in October I am not too sure that the British public will be aware that they will be very vunerable indeed and more to the point not to expect too much from its military anymore.
From my part it will be interesting to see who within the Senior Officers (2 star and above) actually stay or have the honour to resign knowing that this review based purely upon cost has now threatened the number one requirement of any UK Government, the protection and defence of the UK and its global interests.
The way that our PM is flying around the world ensuring his/the UK's 'stamp' is made on Pakistan, Turkey etc, I hope that he will not want to call on his/H M Queen's military in future to help him with his policies and influence, as he will be sorely disappointed or responsible for a British tactical failure when he requests that they act on his behalf after the previous cost cutting outcomes of the SDSR.
What am I missing?