Delivering Security in a Changing World:
Future Capabilities

Personal Message from The Chief Of Defence Staff, General Sir Michael Walker, to Service Personnel

On 12 July the Chancellor announced the money to be made available for defence for the three years up to 2007/8. Today the Secretary of State followed this up by announcing a wide–ranging transformation package for the Armed Forces. The injection of much needed new money into Defence is very positive news and welcomed by the Chiefs of Staff and me.

However, against a background of intense media speculation over the last few months about defence cuts, and the activity reductions we had been planning in some areas this year as a normal part living with in our budget, it would not surprise me if personnel in the Armed Forces were confused. I wanted therefore to tell you in straightforward terms what I believe it all means.

Let me make clear that what the Secretary of State announced today is a plan to enhance our overall defence capability. Funding this, despite the new money, was always going to mean difficult choices and reaching decisions inevitably gives rise to speculation. I would like to set the record straight at my level. Your Chiefs of Staff will provide greater detail and interpretation through the normal chain of command. The starting point for our ambitions has been the Defence White Paper published in December 2003 which sets out our security and policy baseline. For the last six months we have been engaged in a huge exercise to translate these principles into detailed proposals for our force structure and support services. In other words what the policy means in practical terms.

The results have been published today in a supplement to the White Paper, which I encourage all to read. The Senior Management Board in Defence, which includes the Chiefs of Staff, is confident that these proposals capture our aim for a speedy deployable, agile, joint and integrated, technically ambitious defence capability. This will have a wider operational reach than before especially in the context of the war on terrorism. We aim to be able to punch hardest alongside our allies, yet retain some independence from the multinational approach if necessary. And this rationalisation and modernisation of defence must include infrastructure and administrative processes too. This whole approach can be summed up in one word: transformation. Many nations aim for it but find the path very hard going with tough choices. We are committed to it.

We live in a real world. Set against a panoply of outmoded platforms and legacy systems we know we have much to change. But existing contracts, unwelcome cost increases on equipment and domestic and international political realities limit our room for manoeuvre and the pace of change we would wish to see.

Let me start with equipment issues since they account for so much of our expenditure and are central to our vision. I will give you the headlines. As the Defence White Paper says, there are some key parts of Defence we must change. In large operations – where we expect to operate alongside the US – we plan to be able to contribute amphibious and carrier strike task groups and a land manoeuvre division capable of conducting offensive operations. We also expect to be able to contribute air task groups capable of both long range strike and support to land operations, and Special Forces. A range of Command, Control, Communications Computing, Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) assets will form our own network and, integrated with the US, enhance our effect and improve our safety. Our assessment of future military operations, together with experience drawn from the 1991 Gulf War, and more recently Operation Telic, shows this is right.

As operations since the Strategic Defence Review in 1998 have demonstrated, we must also optimise our military capability and force structure for the most likely operations, capitalising on technological advances which make possible significant improvements in Intelligence, Surveillance, Target Acquisition and Reconnaissance (ISTAR) and precision weaponry. At the same time we should not shirk from recognising where threats are reducing. In Anti-Submarine Warfare (ASW) for example, the scale of the threat has unarguably reduced and we judge that we now need less ASW capability in submarines, frigates and maritime patrol aircraft. Further, the reduced air threat to our deployed forces, the capability of our air superiority aircraft and other air defence assets, and the improvements in precision weaponry make fewer aircraft and less ground-based air defence necessary.

And the improving security situation in Northern Ireland means fewer forces need to be permanently assigned there, although we will retain the ability to surge back should this prove necessary. This means we can redirect people and resources to areas within the Army where they can be best used to ease existing and future pressures and make possible the transition to the Future Army Structure.

So in raw terms, we need fewer ships, battalions and aircraft allowing us to free up resources to shift into so-called ‘effects–based’ warfare. That means focusing on the impact our Armed Forces can deliver – rather than the number of systems involved.

Operationally, we are very busy. There is every potential for continued land commitments at the same scale of effort and frequency for some time to come. I recognise the effect this has on people and on training and on important equipment updates. We are working hard to minimise the peaks and troughs, whilst accepting the realities of strategic need and our well-deserved reputation for rapid response.

Despite the immediate pressure on people, which we seek progressively to put right, the overall changes outlined above will result in us needing fewer military and civilian personnel by 2008. The numbers are stark – some 20, 000 in total broadly split between military and civilian personnel. This is partly as a result of forces structure changes but more importantly, because we have identified new systems that will enable us to provide support and administration functions with substantially fewer people. I know this makes many of you feel uncomfortable because of the uncertainty over jobs in the future. However, it is a vital part of our modernisation agenda. I am determined we should manage these reductions as far as possible through normal turnover of people and jobs. But some redundancy will be required. As yet it is too early to provide more detail.

I have told you the situation as I see it in straightforward and clinical terms. Despite the challenges that will undoubtedly attract public debate – and so they should – together we do need to keep our eyes on realistic middle distance ambitions whilst coping with the demands of today. Our future capability lies in the sustainable combination of well-trained and led men and women, equipped with modern battle winning kit.

The Chiefs and I have been fully engaged in all this and, while tough choices have been required, the future force structure and Defence Programme are taking us in a direction which is set to fulfil our policy aspirations. Our international standing as a defence force remains undiminished and we offer genuine military utility. The UK’s forward-looking, sustainable, ‘premier league’ defence capability lies at the heart of the insurance policy that serves this nation’s domestic and international needs. I thank you all for your continuing support.

Delivering Security in a Changing World: Future Capabilities »

Last Updated: 21 Jul 04