THREATS TO BE FACED

The Threat 
by Winston S. Churchill

We live in a dangerous and unstable world and, following the demise of the Soviet threat, the direction and nature of future threats to the security of the UK and her interests worldwide are more diverse and even less predictable.

Looking back over the past 25 years, there were few who foresaw Argentina’s attack on the Falkland Islands in 1982, Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait, or the Al Qaeda attack on the Twin Towers, provoking the Allied retaliation against Afghanistan and the liberation of that country from the Taliban, who are currently staging a fight-back.

Since the time required to bring into service major new equipment programmes, for either of the three Armed Forces, is in the range of 10-15 years, any future war or conflict will essentially have to be fought with the equipment ordered today. There will be no time to build & equip new divisions for the Army, new squadrons for the RAF or new ships for the Royal Navy – hence the vital necessity of the UK maintaining a serious, strong and balanced Defence capability.

Continuing Conflicts in Iraq & Afghanistan – Operations continue at a high intensity against insurgents in Iraq and the resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan. Logistic and technological support by Iran to our enemies in both countries, especially with high-tech IEDs (improvised explosive devices) capable of penetrating anything other than the heaviest and most modern armour, is responsible for an increasing number of UK and US casualties.

Instability in Pakistan – Pakistan, Britain and America’s somewhat ambivalent ally in the war on terror, rests on a knife-edge of instability. Should the military dictatorship of President Pervez Musharraf fall, there is a serious danger that Pakistan – proud, and for the time being, sole possessors of the ‘Moslem Bomb’ – could fall to the friends of Bin Laden and the Taliban.

Iran – The unstable mullocracy, which already deploys missiles capable of striking US & UK bases in the Gulf, has the range to strike Tel Aviv, Istanbul or Athens, and is working flat out to acquire nuclear weapons to fit on them.

There is a serious likelihood that this may, in the near future, provoke the United States or Israel – or both – to attack Iran’s budding nuclear capability. In return Iran, which has armed forces far larger than Britain’s, would strike back at Allied forces and bases in the area, and block the Straits of Hormuz, through which pass some 40% of the West’s oil supplies.

Medium-term Threats (5-10 years):

Iran, in the absence of any decisive action to prevent its acquisition of a nuclear capability, will provide a grave and potent threat to its neighbours, including Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States, no doubt provoking a Nuclear arms-race in the Middle East. There are signs of this already.

If Iran were to carry out its President’s threats, 3-4M Israelis and a couple of million Palestinians may well find themselves consumed in a modern day Holocaust. Furthermore, the survival of London and all the cities of the EU will stand at the mercy of the Iranian mullahs, regardless of any retaliatory capability we may still possess.

North Korea, unless it sets itself firmly on the path of peace (as there is some indication it may be doing) will be a source not merely of regional instability but, if its nuclear ambitions are realised, a source of long-range missiles, radioactive materials, even nuclear weapons, perhaps even to terrorists.

Longer-term Threats (10 years+):

Here we are strictly in ‘crystal ball’ territory, though it must not be forgotten that the equipment we order today will, in the 2020s, be all we will then have to defend ourselves with should an emergency arise.

Russia, on the back of its vast energy reserves has, over the past 5 years, been dramatically increasing its Defence outlays. China, set on present trends to overtake the United States as the most powerful economy in the world, is also becoming a force to be reckoned with militarily.

Unless these goliaths come to espouse the path of democracy in the interim, there is the obvious danger that territorial ambitions, shortages of natural resources, or a dose of good old-fashioned imperialism – which both have demonstrated in the past – could lead to confrontation either with the world’s largest democracy, India, which is also nuclear-armed, or with the United States and Europe.

Meanwhile every city of the Western world will continue to be at risk from the nuclear-armed terrorist, armed with a bomb perhaps no larger than a briefcase or a backpack.

While hoping for the best, it is always prudent to prepare for the worst. Only thus can one be ready to face almost any eventuality. At least, following the ‘locust’ years of disarmament in the 1930s – thanks to the English Channel – we had a year or two’s breathing space to rebuild our defences before the full onslaught of the Nazi war-machine was upon us. The next major war will be strictly a ‘come-as-you-are’ party, with no time to repair the neglect of former years.