Britannia no longer rules the waves, but it can still be a credible power |
Britannia no longer rules the waves, but it can still be a credible power
When he came to power last year, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer promised a “defense dividend.” Defense spending would increase to 3.5 percent over the coming years. That additional money would not only rebuild what had become a desiccated military, but also to create 430,000 additional jobs.
That commitment was made in response to the latest Strategic Defense Review, headed by the highly and deservedly respected Lord George Robertson, a former defense minister and NATO secretary general. On Sept. 12, 2001, he invoked for the first and only time ever NATO ’s Article Five, sending the alliance to war.
This war was not in the German plain against an invading Soviet Army, but in distant Afghanistan, to support the U.S. after the horrendous 9/11 terrorist attacks.
A quarter of a century later, the once formidable British military is hardly a shadow of its former self and the subject of media ridicule. The Royal Navy is down to 15 destroyers and frigates and two aircraft carriers of questionable reliability. It has so few advanced fighter jets that the U.S. Marines were tasked to fill in the numbers. And of seven Astute Class nuclear attack submarines, only one is fully operational.
Retired Army General Sir Richard Barrons, a member of the Strategic Defense Review committee, observed that the Army was only capable of seizing a small English village.
Britain maintains a strategic nuclear deterrent of four nuclear ballistic nuclear submarines. It is proposing to build a follow-on, but delays and cost overruns in that program have been reported as considerable. And it may be no accident that the new head and first sea lord of the Royal Navy is not a sailor at all but a Royal Marine.
Indeed, the second sea lord has been recalled from retirement, suggesting an absence of senior naval leadership. Two Royal Air Force officers are in charge of the Australia-United Kingdom-United States (AUKUS) program to supply Australia with leading edge nuclear attack submarines. Perhaps it is not Denmark, but something seems rotten in the state of the Defense Ministry.
What can be done over the short and longer term regardless of whether or not the promised increase of 3.5 percent in defense spending is honored? Given the wars in Ukraine and Iran, it would seem that intense scrutiny and knowledge of those conflicts might be useful. It can be debated how much, if at all, Clausewitz’s definitions of the character and nature of war have been affected.
However, one observation is vital: In both Ukraine and Iran, the seemingly weaker nation has not been defeated by the immensely more powerful adversary. Since the most likely threat to Europe is Russia — and to some degree, this danger has been greatly exaggerated — that would be the pacing enemy against which to field an effective countervailing force. In the case of Ukraine and Iran, disruption has been the mechanism to avert defeat, thus far achieved by the use of relatively cheap and plentiful weapons in the form of highly lethal unmanned platforms or drones.
From that foundation, the new basis for British strategy would be not to deter and defend at the sub-nuclear strategic level but to prevent and disrupt a potential Russian attack, however unlikely. To achieve this, a Porcupine Defense would raise the costs of any initial foray West to make it unacceptable to Moscow. This would be through a massive commitment to unmanned platforms from the seabed to space, augmented by manned forces.
As the great Chinese general Sun Tzu wrote, “all warfare is based on deception.” Deception is vital to confuse, disrupt and disorient the enemy through misinformation, disinformation and the use of shock and awe to to confound military commanders at all levels. Electronic and information warfare are today crucial to confront adversaries with choices ranging from bad to worse.
The Royal Navy is beginning this approach with a “hybrid” force that reverses the old formula by investing unmanned systems and fielding lower-cost manned platforms. Whether this works remains to be seen, but it might revitalize the force in line with available money.
Meanwhile, the U.K. must keep a strong nuclear deterrent. Will Britannia ever rule the waves again? Probably not, but it could at least sustain and maintain a credible force.
Harlan Ullman, Ph.D., is UPI’s Arnaud deBorchgrave Distinguished Columnist, a senior adviser at the Atlantic Council, the chairman of two private companies and the principal author of the doctrine of shock and awe. He and former United Kingdom Defense Chief Lord David Richards are the authors of a forthcoming book on preventing strategic catastrophe.
Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
More Opinions - International News
Senate Republicans hope Supreme Court ‘surprise’ could help save majority
Trump says Energy secretary 'totally wrong' on gas prices not dropping to $3 ...
Resignation is Trump’s last chance at redemption
Trump’s approval rating sinks to second term low: Poll
As GOP interest in Bondi fizzles, Democrats push for chance to question her
Supreme Court stays out of parental rights case
This week on The Hill: Senate takes first steps on reconciliation 2.0
Patel sues Atlantic over report on job performance, alcohol use
House braces for next wave of potential expulsions focused on ...
Warner announces death of daughter who battled juvenile diabetes
Supreme Court to hear Catholic preschools' case involving same-sex parents
House Democrat: ‘Trump is not well’
Democrats gain ground in Iowa governor’s race
Senate Republican knocks Trump over ‘holy war’ with pope
Republican gubernatorial candidate dismisses Trump’s approval rating in ...
Waltz says Trump’s threats against Iranian civilian infrastructure ...
National Science Foundation’s future in limbo as Trump eyes cuts
The Hill Podcasts – Morning Report