Strategic Defence & Security Review: ‘Soldiers or Ships?’ is the wrong question
Accounting soldiers against ships is strategically illiterate and very dangerous to British interests.
Dr. Andrew Gordon
"The first thing General Richards (if he has been correctly reported in the press) could benefit from realising is that, owing to our being an island, Britain’s Army and Navy have had a symbiotic relationship for centuries, and that the Army can go nowhere without permissive maritime conditions. The Army is both a benefit and a beneficiary of seapower, and has not fought a campaign since 1746 that did not depend on it (and, even then, Cumberland’s army was resupplied by coastal shipping). Every British regimental battle-honour contains the silent suffix ‘…and the Navy got us there’; and further reductions to Britain’s overstretched fleet may mean that the Army will soon find itself undeployable. The only way in which cutting the Fleet to save soldier-numbers would make sense is if all the British Army’s future errands were on the USA’s behalf. If that is the generals’ assumption, Parliament, the public and the Falkland islanders ought to be told now. "
Strategic Defence & Security Review: ?Soldiers or Ships?? is the wrong question | Dr. Andrew Gordon | Critical Reaction