In March of this year, the British nuclear-armed submarine, HMS Vanguard, returned to its Scottish base after an unprecedented 204 days submerged. This extended patrol, which involved 130 crew members, significantly exceeded the typical three-month deployment. The prolonged missions are indicative of the aging fleet's increasing maintenance requirements, resulting in extended time underwater for the submariners.
Reports from a crew member described a challenging situation during these prolonged patrols, with the submarine running low on essential supplies such as food and medicines. As supplies dwindled, crew members resorted to searching for hidden food compartments and even improvised by making bread from custard powder due to a lack of flour. This situation underscores the broader issue of recruitment challenges faced by the Royal Navy's Submarine Service, often referred to as the "Silent Service."
The situation with HMS Vanguard highlights the broader challenges facing Britain's armed forces, which are currently seen as depleted. With troop numbers declining and morale weakening, the state of the UK's military equipment also raises concerns. This situation is particularly troubling given the current geopolitical climate, with growing threats from Russia.
The British government is expected to release its Strategic Defence Review soon, initiated by Sir Keir Starmer to assess threats and propose responses for the armed forces. However, there are doubts about the review's potential effectiveness, given the current state of the military.
Politicians and military leaders acknowledge that Britain's armed forces have been "hollowed out," affecting the Royal Navy, the RAF, and most notably, the British Army. The regular Army, which had nearly 110,000 soldiers in 2010, is now struggling to reach a target of 73,000, insufficient even to fill Cardiff’s Principality Stadium.
Earlier this year, Defence Minister Al Carns warned that the British Army could be depleted within six to 12 months if engaged in a conflict similar to that in Ukraine. The head of the army, General Sir Roly Walker, has stressed the need for readiness by 2027, highlighting the importance of leveraging technology such as drones, new software, and AI. However, Justin Crump, an Army Reserve Officer, argues that technological advancements cannot compensate for the lack of military hardware.
The government plans to streamline the procurement process for new equipment, learning from past mistakes. For example, the delivery of new Ajax armoured vehicles has taken over a decade. The UK’s reliance on NATO is also emphasized, as it forms the cornerstone of the country's security, especially after Russia's invasion of Ukraine.
According to NATO commitments, the UK should be capable of deploying tens of thousands of troops rapidly to defend NATO territories. However, a former senior General has expressed concerns about the UK's ability to sustain supplies, ammunition, and spares in a real war scenario. Britain's limited ground-based air defenses further exacerbate these vulnerabilities.
The shortcomings of Britain’s military contributions to NATO were starkly revealed during a visit by British MPs to a NATO site in Tapa, Estonia, where British soldiers are stationed alongside Danish and French troops. The equipment observed there, including aging Challenger 2 tanks and Warrior armored vehicles, seemed outdated, reminiscent of earlier decades.
At the time of the MPs' visit, the British troops were equipped with some drones but lacked systems to counter enemy drones effectively. Their artillery capabilities were limited, with only 14 long-range artillery guns available, whereas even Estonia had double that number. Since then, efforts have been made to test new technologies designed to enhance soldiers' capabilities.
The prospect of deploying British troops to Ukraine, should a ceasefire occur, presents further challenges. Past campaigns, like the one in Afghanistan, stretched resources even when facing less formidable adversaries. Justin Crump suggests that while a deployment to Ukraine might be feasible, it could strain resources significantly.
The government's Strategic Defence Review aims to address these challenges, with Defence Secretary John Healey promising a significant overhaul of UK defense strategies. However, past reviews have often failed to deliver substantial changes due to financial constraints and evolving global events.
The review's financial assumptions are also under scrutiny, with defense spending expected to be capped at 2.5% of GDP. Many, including General Sir Richard Barrons and NATO's Secretary General, argue for higher spending levels. The government aims to boost spending to 3% in the next parliament, hoping for economic benefits in the process.
Critics argue that the review might be too narrowly focused. A former military chief emphasized the need for a broader cross-government security review to identify threats