“A house divided against itself, cannot stand.”
President Abraham Lincoln
A house divided
August 10th.
Britain is divided against itself. How can Britain afford both domestic
security and national security at a time when both are under threat? Ever since
the banking and monetary crisis of 2008-2010 British security and defence policy
has simply not added up – literally. Successive British governments of all
persuasions have also made huge errors of political and strategic judgement
over the last thirty years one of which has been to rapidly increase the size
of the population whilst cutting vital services. For example, since 2000 the officially
acknowledged British population (it is probably significantly bigger) has grown
from 58.9 million to 68 million people (Macronet) whilst services and other
vital infrastructures have effectively been cut. In 2010, the Cameron government even slashed
the armed forces by 10% during the Afghanistan campaign. These failures of policy
have helped turn a once stable society into a fractured one with potentially
catastrophic social and political consequences. There is much to do to restore Britain,
and it must be done quickly but here are two policy options that must now be
explored: a new form of conscription and a British National Guard.
Whatever the strength
of the British military instrument of power it is and will be effectively
neutered if the home base is politically and socially insecure. Keeping the
peace, be it at home or abroad, requires a continuum of effects from societal security
to credible defence but both are being profoundly undermined by social unrest
and the profound gap between official narrative and a dangerous lack of force
and resource. That is precisely why the
likes of China, Russia and other autocratic states are applying hybrid war against
the British to further exploit what they see as palpable weakness and
instability.
At the high state-on-state
end of the conflict spectrum keeping the peace will require Britain to deploy far
more, more capable, and more capacious armed forces able to project power
quickly allied to the capacity to move in some mass. This is something General Lord Richards and I
explore in great depth in our forthcoming September book “The Retreat from
Strategy.” The changing character of
war will also demand of the British much greater fusion between emerging and disruptive
technologies and military personnel. However, a new form of civil-military
partnership will also be required allied to a new concept of civil defence to
support communities from threats both within and without.
The New Conscription
“There is a
piece of shit at the end of this stick,” shouted the irate Sergeant brandishing
his pacing stick in the face of an uncooperative soldier. “Not this end, Sergeant,” came the reply. The
word ‘conscription’ evokes a vision of unwilling citizens forced to ‘do their
bit’ and ‘square bash’ (march) around draft parade grounds shouted at by an
equally unimpressed regular sergeant. If there is one sure fire way to destroy
the high-end operational effectiveness of a professional force it is to impose
upon them people who do not want to be there and have little desire to cooperate.
At the same time, cuts to the regular armed forces have clearly left Britain’s
armed forces patently unable to meet the roles, missions, and tasks that
Government demands of them.
Future
deterrence and defence will depend on a new form of civil-military cooperation
which is precisely what the citizen armies of the past were. It may still be needed in extremis but before
that a new form conscription could come in the form of a partnership with the
corporate sector. Given the changing
character of war the tech sector has a vital role to play in the form of apprenticeships
are paid for jointly by both the state and companies. Such a system would see young tech savvy
civilians hone and develop their skills in support of national security and
defence in partnership with the state. Additional
tax incentives for both companies and individuals could encourage such
participation which will be vital in the coming age of the AI metaverse. Upon
completion of service draftees would enter a new civil-defence technology
reserve.
A British National
Guard
The summer riots
in England suggest that the traditional model of British policing is no longer
sufficient to deal with a quite different society to the one for which it was
created. The police do have specialist
counter-riot police and mutual support mechanisms, but they too have been
subject to the cuts imposed by the Government ever since the banking and monetary
crisis of 2008-2010. There are simply not enough of them and the majority are
ill-equipped and ill-trained to deal with the spectrum of threats the modern ‘copper’
must confront.
The US National
Guard is comprised of trained civilians under the Department of Defense who can
be called upon both to support the civil authorities in times of emergency and
deployed overseas in support of campaigns.
They also comprise an Active Guard and Reserve made up of former
servicemen and women who retain their training and skills. The irony is that the National Guard dates to
December 1636 and was set up by the then English government in London as the
Colonial Militia. Britain has long had a tradition of territorial reserves, as
well as reserves and volunteer reserves which could be adjusted to form a new
British National Guard.
United we must
stand
Striking a new
security and defence balance will require London to do the one thing it is
patently useless at – new thinking and putting the interests of ALL British
people above and beyond the narrow obsession of bureaucratic politics between
the Palace of Westminster at one end of Whitehall and Trafalgar Square at the
other. It will also demand of a grossly irresponsible political class an end to
the endemic policy short-termism (the COVID virus of politics) which has
enshrined the politically convenient at the expense of the real job of government
which is to face hard reality. Without fear nor favour? There can be neither room for “we want the
1950s and we want it now” nostalgia which seems to be the motivation of at least
some of the rioters, nor the naïve nonsense that there is no link between mass immigration
and societal security. Rather, British
society is what it is, and it is that multicultural society that must be
protected, secured, and defended. That means all its people irrespective of
race, creed, or orientation! Period! To do that will require a new kind of
partnership between a new kind of British state with a new kind of British
society. It is called change.
However, when political
and social cohesion collapses at home so does the capacity of a state to deter
adversaries, defend its people, and realise its critical national
interests. Neither security nor defence
can be credible if the home base is broken.
Projecting power and protecting people are one and the same. A house
divided? It is time for a re-think,
London. Are you (for once) up to it? Are we (for once) up to it?
Julian
Lindley-French
