Thursday, October 07, 2010

Britain's Royal Navy faces draconian cuts

The Navy is set to be reduced to the smallest size in its history after admirals yesterday offered drastic reductions in the fleet in order to save two new aircraft carriers from defence cuts.

Under the plans, the number of warships would be cut by almost half to just 25, with frigates, destroyers, submarines, minesweepers and all amphibious craft scrapped.

Even if built, the new carriers could sail without any British aircraft to fly from them after admirals "mortgaged everything" to persuade ministers not to abandon the £5.2 billion programme. The ships could also be delayed for years and redesigned to save money, defence sources have disclosed.

In a final appeal to the National Security Council, Navy chiefs yesterday offered to make cuts that would reduce the senior service to its smallest since the time of Henry VIII.

One new aircraft carrier is already under construction, but the fate of the second has emerged as the central issue of the Government's Strategic Defence and Security Review, which is supposed to frame military planning for the next decade.
Read the rest here.

Ummm The last time I checked, Great Britain was still an island nation dependent on imports to feed its population. Putting the possible survival of your country in the hands of "allies," no matter how much you may like and trust them now, does not strike me as a wise policy. And reducing the size of the Royal Navy to essentially a heavily armed coast guard would be doing exactly that.

A parting observation... dismantling a powerful professional navy is neither difficult nor terribly time consuming. Rebuilding one in the event of a need would be.

1 comment:

AP said...

Couldn't they just mothball the ships they don't need? If I remember correctly, that's what the US Navy did after World War II, enabling it to put a lot of ships back into active service for the Korean and Vietnam Wars.