Scotland the Brave

Last week the Scottish Global Forum released its report about the future of defence in an independent Scotland, which you can read here. Think Defence brought the issue up and since then a good debate has been drummed up, which can be found here. It was on my 'to do list' to look at this issue anyway, so I might as well do it now while the debate is simmering nicely.

A review of Army 2020

I don't know about you, but I find it quite instructive to go back and read old books and material at a later date to see what I can glean from them that I might have missed first time round. This is especially the case with military books, be they historical works, personal accounts, or studies of tactics and strategy. Often I find that subtle points - lost on the first reading as you come to grips with all the information being presented - will become apparent on a second or third reading, as your brain is now able to process a lot of the technical information and jargon in a more efficient manner, peeling back these layers to reveal the core points underneath.

There's probably a name for this process already, but personally I refer to it as (if you'll indulge a few words of the dreaded management speak, which I normally avoid) "developed understanding". In line with that I went back and had a read of the Army 2020 report that lays out the structure and purpose of the future British Army organisation.

On first reading I, like many others, was left a bit perplexed at how the numbers were all going to add up and the reasoning behind some of the decisions, like the Reaction Force/Adaptable Force split. Having gone back over it at a more leisurely pace I think it's all a bit clearer now. Indeed, it's actually a pretty good solution for the resources given.

So in todays article, I'm planning to lay out some of the stuff that I've learned. Hopefully this will help others who were as confused as I was when the paper was first released. For those who already have a firm grip of Army 2020, you probably wont learn much from this.

We Will Remember Them

Please feel free to leave any thoughts or memorials in the comments.

Quick update

Three things I'd like to mention quickly;

1) Google can go jump off a %&!$ing cliff. The reason you're having to force people to use Google+ is because nobody is interested in it. Because it's pointless and shite. Forcing us to use it will not change that fact.

2) Apologies to the anonymous commentor who wrote out a comment on the "Carry On Up The Clyde" article that didn't appear. It was sucked up by Googles spam filter which I only check every couple of days. That comment has now been approved and posted, whomever it may belong to.

3) My next article will be about Army 2020. I've almost finished that, but I'm going to wait until after Remembrance day to post it. So keep an eye out for that one on Tuesday.

Carry On Up The Clyde

Today I managed to slack off for a few hours... sorry, I mean I found the time for some personal professional development in a solitary and reflective environment, during which I managed to catch the defence minister Phillip Hammonds speech about the announced restructuring being undertaken by BAE in its ship building business, along with the questions that followed.

Normally watching MPs debate in the House of Commons is about as thrilling as watching paint dry, but today was... well, really no different. Though it did have some moments of interest that we'll look at.

I Reserve the right to disagree (and make up appalling titles for blog posts)

There's been a lot of talk recently about Army 2020, the reserves, the perils of letting Capita run anything more complex than a church fete, and whether the UK will meet its recruitment targets going forward. Sir Humphrey over at the Thin Pinstriped Line has recently written a piece about this very topic, offering a more positive and "glass half full" take on the current situation, which you can read by following this link.

I on the other hand, am about to do the opposite. In many regards I think the theory of making greater use of the reserves is a good idea, and considering the government has no real appetite for defence spending, reserves could end up playing a vital role in the future. But I'm not really convinced the reality is going to match the concept. This is why.

You're on my patch!

Right, time to sit down and ponder again for a bit. Today's post revolves around an ongoing debate that's come up at places like Think Defence and others on a routine basis, in a variety of forms, and one that I think is quite interesting. It often starts with calls to disband the RAF, the RAF Regiment, or similar such arguments.

What we're looking at today is the degree to which the various services overlap into each others primary areas of responsibility.

The end of the COIN wars?

The period from around 2003 till the present - at least in terms of UK defence - has been dominated by the so called "COIN Wars" (COunter-INsurgency) in Iraq and Afghanistan. The fighting has been bloody and bitter. It has cost many hundreds of British fatalities and that's even before we get into the issue of suicides among post-tour service personnel. Thousands more have been left with a variety of lasting wounds, ranging from superficial scars to lost limbs and deep mental traumas.

This has been the human legacy of Iraq and Afghanistan, alongside the widely distributed images of coffins draped in British flags being carried off of aeroplanes and then driven solemnly through the streets of towns such as Royal Wotton Basset. The financial cost has also been enormous, with some estimates putting the cost of Afghanistan alone at around £40 billion by the time we withdraw.

Against this back drop, public appetite for future COIN wars seems slim. And thus the prevailing attitude among those with an interest in military matters seems to be that Britain will never again fight such a war, or at the very least not in the near future. 

My contention today is that this might prove to be wishful thinking. Indeed, if we find ourselves unprepared, it might in fact be very dangerous thinking.

The Somme, then and now

This morning I received an e-mail with a little link in it to YouTube. The link took me to what is quite possibly one of the best pieces of history filming I've seen in a long while.

I have no idea who "Tashkenk Goatman" is, other than that looking through his other videos I realised that I've already re-posted some of his work in the past (a series of videos captured at Sailsbury Plain of the British army showing off its armoured warfare capabilities).

Whoever he and his friend in this new video might be, I commend them. This really is a quality piece of work, looking back at the battlefields of the Somme and comparing footage filmed back then with the modern landscape, with the cameras seemingly sited in almost the exact same spots. For amateur work it's pretty remarkable and well worth the quarter of an hour it'll take for you to watch.

Update 04/10/13

Is it really October already? Blimey. 2014 approaches.

As for me personally I've been quiet busy again, as I'm sure most of you will have noticed, but (he says) tomorrow looks a little more open so I might have a chance to polish off something I've been working on slowly for the last couple of days.

A few bits of news I thought my be worth shedding some light on, the first being that the last sections of HMS Queen Elizabeths flight deck have been installed. Next piece; the ramp. Here's a link for more details; https://www.gov.uk/government/news/hms-queen-elizabeth-flight-deck-completed

Secondly, 6 squadron RAF has deployed to Sweden as part of Exercise Arctic Challenge and they've even had time to pose for this snap; https://twitter.com/RAFLeuchars/status/386115704316911617/photo/1

Finally, 117 British forces personnel have been recognised as part the Operational Honours and Awards list 41 (September 2012 - April 2013). The complete list includes members of all three services and can be found here; https://www.gov.uk/government/news/operational-honours-and-awards-list-4-october-2013