Image via Wikipedia

The following is the transcript of an actual radio conversation in October 1995, between a US Navy ship and the British authorities off the north coast of Scotland . The transcript was released by the MoD on the 10/10/95.

BRITISH: Please divert your course 15 degrees to the South. to avoid collision. US Navy : Recommend you divert YOUR course 15 degrees to the North to avoid collision

BRITISH: Negative You will have to divert your course 15 degrees to the South to avoid collision US Navy : This is the Captain of US Navy ship. I say again, divert YOUR course.

BRITISH: Negative I say again divert your course.

US Navy : . THIS IS THE AIRCRAFT CARRIER ‘USS LINCOLN’ THE SECOND LARGEST SHIP IN THE UNITED STATES’ ATLANTIC FLEET. WE ARE ACCOMPANIED BY THREE DESTROYERS, THREE CRUISERS AND NUMEROUS SUPPORT VESSELS. DEMAND THAT YOU CHANGE YOUR COURSE 15 DEGREES NORTH, THAT’S 15 DEGREES NORTH, OR COUNTER MEASURES WILL BE UNDERTAKEN TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THIS SHIP

BRITISH : We are a lighthouse. Piss off!

As an Artillery Officer of many years ago I am delighted to see that the Armed Forces will soon be lead by a Gunner Officer.

General Sir David Richards is a distinguished and experienced commander with wonderful diplomatic skills. He has commanded soldiers in Afghanistan and lead successful operations in places like Somalia where he is considered to have been instrumental in defending and securing the future of the Government there. His operational experience in Afghanistan and the respect in which he is held by that country’s Government will be great assets.

To have such an experienced officer elevated to command and lead our forces is a tremendous fortune and I wish him the very best  in the challenging times to come.

It’s also worth noting that he is a bit of a local boy in Wales having attended Cardiff University where he gained his degree in Politics and Economics.

Image by Defence Images via Flickr

The Government is undertaking a Strategic Defence Review that will inevitably change the role, shape and capability of our Armed Forces in a way that has not been done for several decades. It promised to be a root and branch review, driven in part by a need to cut costs and a need to reduce the endemic waste that has permeated the Ministry of Defence for many years.

Illogically though the Secretary of State for Defence has announced that Air Chief Marshall Sir Jock Stirupp, the Chief of the Defence Staff, will leave his post in the Autumn, after the review has been made. Whilst this may seem a “nice” way of removing the head man, it is a weak option at a time of such critical change. Plans need to be implemented by those who make them, it is extremely challenging – unnecessarily so – for someone to adopt somebody else’s plans and deliver them successfully.

Whilst Liam Fox is right to remove Sir Jock, his delay in doing so is a sign of misunderstanding of the need to plan, deliver and be accountable. An opportunity has been missed.

Image via Wikipedia

Britain has made tanks since, well inventing the monsters in the First World War. We’ve made some of the best, exported them widely and employed many hundreds if not thousands of people in doing so. As a result the tank has not only been a crucial weapon for our military, but a truly economic weapon as well as all good decent procurement should be. Our Armed Forces now need a new tank, not big ones like the world famous Challenger or Chieftain, but a replacement for the Scimitar that is such an important part of the inventory in Afghanistan. The Armed Forces decided that their preferred option is the British Aerospace CV90, but for some unexplained reason the Government has decided that the replacements will be made by General Dynamics (a Canadian company) and will be built in Austria and Spain. My military history is not the best in the world, but I can’t recall any Austrian or Spanish tanks performing with distinction on battlefields over the years in the way that British tanks have. Nor can I recall how the research and development of armour in those countries has benefitted anyone, let alone Britain. The Government has evidently failed the country again: not only are we buying abroad when we could easily buy at home, we are also going to lose jobs at a time when we can ill afford to do so. And of course, when we decide to build tanks ourselves again in the future, we won’t have the skills to do so. This Government needs to be replaced.

A very good BBC Wales programme tonight debating Afghanistan was let down by some poor political comment, in particular by the abysmal Wayne David.

So few links were made, or understood, about the need to relate defence and military action to political objectives and diplomacy.

I’ve banged on about this for ages: War is Diplomacy by violent means.

It only buys time for Politicians to seek a negotiated settlement. It was therefore refreshing to see Elfyn Llwyd articulate the need to open diplomatic efforts of a non military kind. Even more refreshing was the quiet support from the military men in the audience.

Diplomacy is the only way to enduring solutions. Politicians need to understand this and understand this soon.

I was amused today to hear Bob Ainsworth on the lunch time news talking about his trip to Afghanistan over the weekend. All the right messages about the need, the timing and of course the value of showing support. But the bit that really made me smile was his comments about the timing.

If I caught it correctly, and I was driving so may have made a mistake, he said that there was no relationship between the PM’s visit the day before and Brown’s appearance at the Chilcot Inquiry. He suggested that these visits were planned a long time in advance and suggestions about political gamesmanship were abject nonsense.

Directly after making that point he did admit that his own trip had of course been re-arranged a few times, and you’ve just got to wonder he was pulling the strings on that one. Why did it need the Prime Monster to visit Afghanistan to announce new vehicles for the Army, surely that is the role of the Defence Secretary, isn’t it?

Just like buses, you wait for ages for a Minister to turn up in Afghanistan and all of a sudden two come along in quick succession. And like some buses they are Bendy Buses: bending to fend off the growing sense of revulsion at the ongoing lack of support to the Military in prosecuting hugely unpopular wars.

Image via Wikipedia

History has a habit of repeating itself and I can’t help but remember how it was in 1982 when the last Argentine threat to the Falkland Islands materialised.

We faced a Defence Review, or certainly serious discussions about the role of the Royal Navy in particular, and we had a Prime Minister who was definitely  ”under pressure” in terms of relationship with the country.

There can be little doubt that the 1982 invasion of the Falklands by Argentina helped transform the popularity of Margaret Thatcher and it also saved efforts to cut the Navy. Please let us not see a repeat of either again this year.

“You’ve got to have surprise, and it’s binary: you’ve either surprised your enemy or he knows you’re coming. You can’t have a little bit of surprise.”

That was a key message during my early training in the Army: so why oh why have we heard all this week about the impending massive assault by Allied troops in Afghanistan? Surely the Taleban read the Telegraph and watch News 24 and might just have got an inkling we were on our way.

The world of war fighting has changed. Gen McCrystal, the US commander in Afghanistan has recognised that to win in Afghanistan it is probably better not to fight as that endangers innocent by-standers. Instead we are seeing a war that is being fought to win the ground and then through having enough local troops to stay on that ground, win the hearts and minds of the population.

The warnings of the build up to the attacks were, in my opinion, an attempt to avoid any fighting, they were designed to encourage the Taleban, or some of them anyway, to withdraw. This avoided civilian casualties as the territory was won, but it will also have given two critical additional benefits.

First: the Taleban were forced to move. This is disruptive and whilst in itself not critical will have lead to the second benefit which was opportunity for ambush of withdrawing enemy. It would be very surprising if there were no attacks on withdrawing fighters as they sought refuge elsewhere. Don’t however expect to hear much about these operations as they would have been conducted by elements of the military who don’t want to be in the papers.

In this new era of war fighting, it is clear that the old rules don’t apply It is to McCrystal’s credit that he sees the value of peaceful operations in order to generate peace in the long term. The locals are more likely to talk to you if you’ve not been shooting at them.

Image via Wikipedia

I’m an ex Army man – so I’m probably a bit biased, but the message from the First Sea Lord this week about our future defence cannot go without comment.

And the comment is simple: where the bloody hell is the Royal Navy in support of the disaster in Haiti?

If we’ve a need to project power globally, and all our current fighting in Afghanistan is about as far as you can get from water, why isn’t the Royal Navy doing something to support the efforts in Haiti?

There appears to be an obsession with the idea that 100 soldiers killed in Afghanistan is a significant milestone. It isn’t.

The number 100 is a man made construct, only relevant because we count in the decimal system. Just as a kilometre is a “milestone”, so too is a mile but in a different way to a kilometre. They are all units of measure, not importance.

The loss of any individual is hugely important to family and friends and the loss of the first, 10th 100th and no doubt the 101st will all be equally important in their own unique way and to their unique relationships.

We lost 253 servicemen during the 6 weeks of the Falklands War. This year we have sadly lost 100 servicemen in Afghanistan. We will lose more, possibly even this year, and those losses will be equally painful but they will be no less a milestone to the families impacted. Every death is a important milestone, but if we turn back then all the miles walked will have been for nought.