SerpApi.Org
Like it or not, the new Prime Minister’s first duty is not housing, the economy or the NHS. It is to ensure that Britain has a credible conventional deterrent capable of preventing war. Without security, every domestic priority becomes irrelevant.
The Prime Minister can no longer afford to focus on regional priorities or the politics that brought him to Downing Street. His responsibility now stretches from the White Cliffs of Dover to the High North, from the Baltic to the Indo-Pacific. He must forget about Manchester and concentrate on defending the United Kingdom.
The timing could scarcely be worse. Moscow and Kyiv continue to exchange devastating strikes deep into each other’s territory, while the conflict involving Iran threatens to draw in ever more international players. At moments of political uncertainty, Britain’s adversaries do not pause; they probe for weakness. They test our resolve.
If anyone believes that a Russian frigate conducting live-fire exercises with heavy-calibre guns just south of the Royal Navy’s base at Plymouth was merely coincidence, they are dangerously naïve. Russia has been conducting hybrid warfare against Britain for years.
Cyber-attacks, sabotage, espionage, disinformation and military intimidation are all part of the Kremlin’s playbook. Vladimir Putin understands that if he can unsettle Britain’s defence posture, he weakens confidence across Nato and Europe.
That is why instability at the top of the Ministry of Defence matters. Three Defence Secretaries in as many weeks may appear an inconvenience in Westminster, but in Moscow it will be viewed as an opportunity.
Wes Streeting is undoubtedly an accomplished politician, but defence is unlike any other government department. Decisions can involve life and death, national survival and the possible commitment of British forces to combat. They require confidence, experience and, above all, the trust of the Armed Forces.
Dan Jarvis served with distinction as an officer in the Parachute Regiment and commands enormous respect throughout the military. Palming him off to the security brief seems like a stitch-up to buy his silence. His experience cannot simply be replicated by reading briefing papers.
The greatest asset of our Armed Forces is not Challenger tanks, F-35s or submarines. It is the people who operate them. As Napoleon observed: “The moral is to the physical as three is to one.”
In military terms, morale remains the decisive factor. The constant political upheaval has inevitably created uncertainty within the Ministry of Defence at precisely the moment Britain needs clarity and confidence.
Should a crisis erupt during Streeting’s first weeks in office, whether in Eastern Europe, the Middle East or elsewhere, he may find himself making decisions that no politician ever wishes to make, and we have a new Prime Minister who knows little more about defence than he does.
The military will advise, but ultimately decisions rest with ministers. There is no substitute for preparation.
Equally significant is the appointment of Ed Miliband as Foreign Secretary. I remember standing in Syria in 2013 after Bashar al-Assad murdered around 1,500 civilians with sarin nerve agent in Ghouta.
The world had drawn a red line, yet the UK Parliament vetoed a military response – because our new Foreign Secretary whipped his MPs to vote against it.
The consequences were horrific and that vote will remain a stain on our national reputation for a very long time. I returned to Ghouta last year and I can assure you, the scars left by Miliband’s decision are still very painful.
Many of us who have served in chemical weapons defence believe that Britain’s – Miliband’s – moral failure in 2013 fundamentally altered Putin’s calculations. Assad, backed by Russia, continued to employ chemical weapons with virtual impunity.
The Kremlin concluded that the West lacked the resolve to confront aggression. A year later Putin began his invasion of Ukraine. Today he uses chemical weapons on an industrial scale.
History rarely repeats itself exactly, but it often rhymes. The perception of weakness is every bit as dangerous as weakness itself.
Defence cannot be treated as another piece in Westminster’s political chess game. It is the foundation upon which every other government policy depends. Without security there can be no prosperity, no investment and no confidence.
The encouraging news is that John Healey, the new Chancellor, appears determined to continue rebuilding Britain’s military capability after decades of neglect.
If Streeting learns quickly, and surrounds himself with experienced military advisers, he can succeed. Equally, one hopes that Miliband has reflected on his shameful error of 2013 and now understands the price of failing to deter dictators.
If Britain sends the wrong signals now, Andy Burnham may discover that his premiership is measured not in years but in months.
More importantly, the United Kingdom could once again find itself staring into the abyss, not through any desire for war, but through a failure to prepare for it.
Recommended
Streeting refuses to cut health to boost defence spending
Col Hamish de Bretton-Gordon commanded the UK and Nato Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) defence forces and helped set up the CBRN Task Force in Syria
