THE BEST DEFENCE

By Jason Moore BRITAIN has one of the largest defence budgets in the world but allegedly has no equipment and no manpower. Britain was unable to send troops to Lebanon, because among other reasons, all its troops are committed in Afghanistan and Iraq, it can't enforce the blockade on North Korea because it doesn't have enough warships and one senior officer in Afghanistan was quoted as saying that the Royal Air Force had been “useless” when it comes to supporting his ground troops. And to make matters worse the head of the army comes out and starts making political statements. Even countries like Spain, which have a tiny defence budget, have troops deployed in Lebanon, Afghanistan and the Balkans. Their warships also form part of NATO forces. The British army has a total strength of 100'000 men and women of which about a quarter are deployed on operations overseas. The Royal Navy has 25 frigates and destroyers, of which about four are involved in operations in the Gulf, Mediterranean and Atlantic. What I don't understand is that other countries, such as Australia, are involved militarily all over the world and manage to do so with far fewer resources than Britain. My advice to the generals is rather than getting involved in issues which are not really part of their mandate, they should take a closer look at their armed services and establish whether the tax-payer is getting value for money. If the equipment is poor and troops are badly paid, where is the money going?