Britain's capacity for high-intensity warfare 'in doubt'

Report states that UK's military has 'significant capability deficiencies' while threat of war with Russia remains high

A British Challenger 2 tank in eastern Europe. Britain's armed forces need more personnel and equipment, a parliamentary report warns. PA

Britain’s ability to mobilise for high-intensity warfare is “in doubt” due to shortfalls in personnel and equipment, the UK parliament’s defence committee has warned.

Despite spending more than £50 billion ($63bn) a year on its armed forces, the UK still requires heavy investment to fight alongside its allies against a foe such as Russia, the committee said in a report.

The British Army, in particular, is in a parlous state with the former head of the military, Gen Sir Nick Carter, stating that it was the “weakest” of the three services with “significant capability deficiencies”.

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine had “fundamentally changed the threat”, demonstrating that Moscow had the “capability and intent to prosecute a war in Europe”, warned the report, titled Ready for War?

“This requires a wholesale shift in approach towards warfighting resilience,” the MPs said.

“Warfighting readiness – the ability to deploy and sustain a force that can fight at high intensity in multiple domains for a prolonged period of time – we find this to be in doubt.”

The report urged the government to act swiftly to remedy the lack of preparedness so it could “face the storm clouds on the horizon”.

It quoted US Gen Ben Hodges who recounted how the British Army ran out of munitions eight days into a 10-day US wargaming exercise in 2021.

Gen Hodges told The National that while the British forces’ “quality is superb” the quantity in the army, navy and RAF was “wholly inadequate for all the things that I expect that His Majesty's government requires in the military”.

“It's a question: do you have the defence that you can afford or the defence that you need? It seems to me that the UK has what it can afford and not all it needs,” he said.

On Friday, President Vladimir Putin said Russia had created more than half a million new jobs in its defence sector “to meet soaring demand on the battlefield”. “In order to be successful on the battlefield today, it is necessary to react quickly and adequately to what is happening there,” Mr Putin said.

Currently there are more than 7,000 British troops deployed around the world on 40 overseas operations.

In addition to standing commitments, such as in Eastern Europe and the Falkland Islands, there is now a Royal Navy task group in the east Mediterranean and Red Sea, meaning 1,000 extra personnel are on operations.

Furthermore, a warship had been sent to Guyana to deter Venezuela’s territorial ambitions and a battalion of infantry deployed to Kosovo as tensions rise with Serbia.

Britain’s military had been “deployed above their capacity” due to “the worsening security situation” while capability and stockpile shortages remained.

“They are also consistently overstretched, and this has negatively impacted retention as well as delaying the development of warfighting readiness,” the MPs said.

Meanwhile the army has shrunk to its lowest numbers in two centuries, 72,000, and the Ministry of Defence has admitted that for every eight service personnel who leave it currently recruits only five.

“The increase in global instability has coincided with a period of decreasing recruitment and reduced industrial capacity,” the report stated. “The Government risks being unable to build true warfighting and strategic readiness because of the sheer pace of operations, which could threaten the security of the UK.”

However, with two new aircraft carriers – that have yet to be deployed to the Middle East – the Royal Navy was undergoing a “maritime renaissance” with Britain moving towards a sea-dominated strategy that prioritised naval operations above those of land and air.

The navy also made up 25 per cent of Nato’s maritime capacity, the report noted.

Despite the defence secretary’s insistence that the forces had “sufficient capacity to deploy in response to world events”, the MPs said: “We remain to be convinced.”

They added that the current requirement was “in danger of pushing the armed forces far beyond what is sustainable” and recommend a budget increase or stricter prioritisation of operations.

The MPs also criticised the government for hampering “our attempts to assess readiness” by failing to provide timely information “leading to suspicion that the forces are less ready than in fact they are”.

Sir Jeremy Quin, chairman of the Defence Committee, said: “Our armed services are a world-class fighting force. We are fortunate that they contain highly trained, skilled and experienced service personnel.

“When undertaking their duties, they demonstrate immense bravery and flexibility, responding to a range of crises and threats worldwide without hesitation, never wavering in their commitment to protecting our nation.

“However, a steady, continuous drip of operations and ongoing commitments has meant the military is unable to devote sufficient training and resources to high-intensity warfighting.

“While able to deploy at short notice and to fulfil commitments, our inquiry found that readiness for all-out, prolonged war has received insufficient attention and needs intense ongoing focus.

“On top of this, the high tempo of operations and unrelenting pressure on our services has led to a drop in retention, compounded by a period of low recruitment and difficulties introducing and maintaining capabilities, thereby creating a vicious cycle.”