Everyone has had a good laugh over the Kremlin’s decision to send its ageing rust bucket of an aircraft carrier through the English channel on its way to support Russia’s military onslaught in Syria.
There have been stories galore about the multitude of ailments afflicting the 55,000-ton Admiral Kuznetsov, Russia’s last remaining carrier from the Soviet era, which billowed unpleasant clouds of black smoke as she passed through the Dover Strait.
The ship’s plumbing, we are told, is so bad that many of her toilets are out of action, not an ideal arrangement where the 2,000-strong crew are required to spend months at sea. Meanwhile severe technical problems with the steam turbines that power the ship means that she needs to be accompanied by an ocean-going tug, just in case she breaks down.
Having once managed to visit the Murmansk headquarters of Russia’s Northern Fleet, just after Vladimir Putin came to power, I cannot say I am entirely surprised by this somewhat unflattering assessment of Russia’s naval prowess. During a dinner I attended with the local commander, he became so intoxicated with the large quantities of vodka he consumed that he struggled to complete his speech to the assembled guests.
It made me think that if this is how Russia’s top brass conduct themselves, then the Russian threat amounted to little more than nationalist tub-thumping.
And, for many, the Admiral Kuznetsov’s passage to the eastern Mediterranean only seems to confirm the view that, for all President Putin’s bravado, today’s Russian military is no match for its Soviet forebears.
That said, it would be foolhardy for the Government to underestimate the ability of the Russians to make mischief, even with their limited military resources.
Moscow’s illegal annexation of territory in Georgia and Ukraine, as wellas its brutal assault on rebel forces in Syria, are all part of Mr Putin’s plan to re-establish Russia as a major player on the world stage. And, with America transfixed by the horror show that the current presidential election contest has become, who is to say the opportunistic Mr Putin might not be tempted to embark on yet another military adventure, perhaps this time focusing his attention on the vulnerable Baltic states?To prevent further acts of Russian encroachment, though, means that we need to have a robust military response of our own which, thanks to the recent damaging cuts the Tories have made to defence spending, is very much open to question.
It is all very well sniggering about the inadequacies of Russia’s dilapidated aircraft carrier. But at least the Russians have one, which is more than we can say for our own Royal Navy, which is currently observing an enforced “holiday” in carrier strike capability as a result of the Government’s 2010 defence review.
In their wisdom, the architects of this apology for a national security doctrine argued that, as Britain faced no tangible threat for the foreseeable future, we could afford to scrap the Invincible-class carriers and their trusty Harrier jets. The same flawed logic led them to do away with maritime patrol aircraft, our first line of defence in protecting the Trident nuclear fleet from the unwelcome attentions of Russian submarines.
Thankfully, some of these gaps are being filled as a result of the new money made available by the 2015 defence review, which has allowedthe MoD to spend £3 billion for nine Boeing P-8a Poseidon planes that will help to protect the new generation of Trident submarines, as well as the two new Queen Elizabeth aircraft carriers. The 2015 review has also provided the funds to ensure we can buy sufficient numbers of Lockheed Martin F-35 multi-role combat aircraft to make the carriers a credible force.
Indeed, ministers tell me that, while mistakes have been made in the past, the current military settlement, which guarantees defence spending at 2 per cent of GDP, goes a long way towards repairing the damage, and will allow Britain to reclaim its status as a leading military power.
"Although the goverment is willing to buy sophisticated new kit, much of it will not be available for several years"
This rosy outlook, however, is not shared by senior officers, who argue years of cutbacks have made the military a hollow force that would struggle to deal with future Russian threats. Another consideration is that, although the government is willing to buy sophisticated new kit, much of it will not be available for several years. The P8s, for example, do not enter service until 2019, while the new carriers are not expected to be fully operational until the 2020s
Clearly, given Russia’s current inclination to exploit any chink in the armour of the Western alliance, we need to have a long, hard think as to whether we can allow this parlous state of affairs to continue.
I am told, for example, it is feasible to get one of our carriers operational by 2018, even if it means getting the US Marine Corps to fly warplanes off her deck. This is not ideal, but it would have the virtue of letting Moscow know that, at least when it comes to aircraft carriers, the Royal Navy is still a force to be reckoned with.
Source telegraph.co.uk
No comments:
Post a Comment