Al Mayadeen English

  • Ar
  • Es
  • x
Al Mayadeen English

Slogan

  • News
    • Politics
    • Economy
    • Sports
    • Arts&Culture
    • Health
    • Miscellaneous
    • Technology
    • Environment
  • Articles
    • Opinion
    • Analysis
    • Blog
    • Features
  • Videos
    • NewsFeed
    • Video Features
    • Explainers
    • TV
    • Digital Series
  • Infographs
  • In Pictures
  • • LIVE
News
  • Politics
  • Economy
  • Sports
  • Arts&Culture
  • Health
  • Miscellaneous
  • Technology
  • Environment
Articles
  • Opinion
  • Analysis
  • Blog
  • Features
Videos
  • NewsFeed
  • Video Features
  • Explainers
  • TV
  • Digital Series
Infographs
In Pictures
  • Africa
  • Asia
  • Asia-Pacific
  • Europe
  • Latin America
  • MENA
  • Palestine
  • US & Canada
BREAKING
Israeli media: Several soldiers were killed in the Beit Hanoun ambush
Israeli media: 16 soldiers were injured, including four in critical condition, as a result of a security incident in the northern Gaza Strip
Israeli media: At least 10 soldiers injured in two serious incidents in the Gaza Strip
Brigadier General Shakarchi to Al Mayadeen: Hezbollah is an independent force defending its country, just like all resistance movements in the region
Brigadier General Shakarchi to Al Mayadeen: All Iranians set aside their differences and united to confront the aggression
Brigadier General Shakarchi to Al Mayadeen: Words like surrender or retreat do not exist in our books or dictionaries, and any aggression will be met with unforgettable blows
Brigadier General Shakarchi to Al Mayadeen: Many Western countries rushed to send weapons to the [Israeli] entity after the end of its aggression against Iran
Brigadier General Shakarchi to Al Mayadeen: In the event of any mistake or act of aggression, we will cross all red lines
Brigadier General Shakarchi to Al Mayadeen: The Israeli army and US forces deployed across West Asia are within the range of our armed forces' firepower
Brigadier General Shakarchi to Al Mayadeen: The United States is primarily responsible for the war on Iran, and we warn it, its proxy, and all those who support them against launching any new aggression

Collapsing Empire: RIP Royal Navy

  • Kit Klarenberg Kit Klarenberg
  • Source: Al Mayadeen English
  • 23 Nov 2024 17:51
  • 4 Shares
9 Min Read

The British Royal Navy "has put all of its eggs in a particularly large and expensive basket,” that of its very unreliable aircraft carriers that may be put out of commission in the coming years.

  • x
  • The Empire’s inability to outsource its hegemonic duties to Britain has created a critical “carrier gap”. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Ali al-Hadi Shmeiss)
    The Empire’s inability to outsource its hegemonic duties to Britain has created a critical “carrier gap”. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Ali al-Hadi Shmeiss)

On November 15th, The Times published a remarkable report, revealing serious “questions” are being asked about the viability of Britain’s two flagship aircraft carriers, at the highest levels of London’s defence establishment. Such perspectives would have been unreportable mere months ago. Yet, subsequent reporting seemingly confirms the vessels are for the chop. Should that come to pass, it will represent an absolutely crushing, historic defeat for the Royal Navy - and the US Empire in turn - without a single shot fired.

The HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales first set sail in 2017 and 2019 respectively, after 20 years in development. The former arrived at the Royal Navy’s historic Portsmouth base with considerable fanfare, a Ministry of Defence press release boasting that the carrier would be deployed “in every ocean around the world over the next five decades.” The pair were and remain the biggest and most expensive ships built in British history, costing close to $8 billion combined. Ongoing operational costs are likewise vast.

Fast forward to today however, and British ministers and military chiefs are, per The Times, “under immense pressure to make billions of pounds’ worth of savings,” with major “casualties” certain. Resultantly, senior Ministry of Defence and Treasury officials are considering scrapping at least one of the carriers, if not both. The reason is simple - “in most war games, the carriers get sunk,” and are “particularly vulnerable to missiles.” As such, the pair are now widely perceived as the “Royal Navy’s weak link.” 

Matthew Savill of British state-tied Royal United Services Institute told The Times that missile technology is developing “at such a pace” that carriers are rapidly becoming easy for Britain’s adversaries to “locate and track”, then neutralise. “In particular,” he cautioned, China is increasing the range of its ballistic and supersonic anti-ship missiles. Meanwhile, Beijing’s “hypersonic glide vehicle”, the DF-17, “can evade existing missile defence systems,” its “range, speed and manoeuvrability” making it a “formidable weapon” neither Britain nor the US can adequately counter.

Savill advocated “cutting one or both of the carriers,” as this “would free up people and running costs and those could be reinvested in the running costs of the rest of the fleet and easing the stresses on personnel”. Nonetheless, he warned that scrapping the carriers would be a “big deal for a navy that has designed itself around those carriers…and that the £6.2 billion paid for them would be a sunk cost.”

That the Royal Navy has “designed itself” around the two carriers is an understatement. For just one to set sail, it must be supported by a strike group consisting of two Type 45 destroyers for air defence, two Type 23 frigates for anti-submarine warfare, a submarine, a fleet tanker and a support ship. This “full-fat protective approach”, Savill lamented, means “most of the deployable Royal Navy” must accompany a single carrier at any given time:

“You can protect the carriers, but then the Navy has put all of its eggs in a particularly large and expensive basket.”

‘National Embarrassment’

March 2021 saw the publication of a long-awaited report, Global Britain in a Competitive Age - “a comprehensive articulation” of London’s “national security and international policy,” intended to “[shape] the open international order of the future.” The two aircraft carriers loomed large in its contents. One passage referred to how HMS Queen Elizabeth would soon lead Britain’s “most ambitious global deployment for two decades, visiting the Mediterranean, the Middle East and the Indo-Pacific”:

Related News

Collapsing Empire: RIP US Aircraft Carriers

“She will demonstrate our interoperability with allies and partners - in particular the US - and our ability to project cutting-edge military power in support of NATO and international maritime security. Her deployment will also help the government to deepen our diplomatic and prosperity links with allies and partners worldwide.”

Such bombast directly echoed the bold wording of a July 1998 strategic defence review, initiated a year earlier by then-prime minister Tony Blair. Its findings kickstarted London’s quest to acquire world-leading aircraft carriers, which culminated with the birth of HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. Britain’s explicit objective, directly inspired by the US Empire’s dependence on carriers to belligerently project its diplomatic, economic, military and political interests abroad, was to recover London’s role as world police officer, and audaciously assert herself overseas: 

“In the post-Cold War world, we must be prepared to go to the crisis, rather than have the crisis come to us. So we plan to buy two new larger aircraft carriers to project power more flexibly around the world…This will give us a fully independent ability to deploy a powerful combat force to potential trouble spots without waiting for basing agreements on other countries’ territory. We will…be poised in international waters and most effectively back up diplomacy with the threat of force.”

Blair’s reverie appeared to finally come to pass in May 2021, when HMS Queen Elizabeth set off on a grand tour of the world’s oceans, escorted by a vast carrier strike group. Over the next six months, the vessel engaged in a large number of widely-publicised exercises with foreign navies, including NATO allies, and docked in dozens of countries. Press coverage was universally fawning. Yet, in November, as the excursion was nearing its end, an F-35 fighter launched from the carrier unceremoniously crashed. 

The F-35’s myriad issues were by that point well-established. The jet, which has cost US taxpayers close to $2 trillion, entered into active service in 2006 while still under development. It quickly gained a reputation for hazardous unreliability. In 2015, a Pentagon report acknowledged its severe structural issues, limited service life and low flight-time capacity. Two years later, the Department of Defense quietly admitted the US Joint Program Office had been secretly recategorising F-35 failure incidents to make the plane appear safe to fly. 

Despite this, the HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales were specifically designed to transport the F-35, to the exclusion of all other fighter jets. However, Britain has all along struggled to source usable F-35s, which produces the ludicrous situation of the two carriers almost invariably patrolling seas with few if any fighters aboard at all, therefore invalidating their entire raison d’être. In November 2023, the Daily Telegraph dubbed these regular “jet-less” forays a “national embarrassment”.

‘Carrier Gap’

An even graver embarrassment, rarely discussed with any seriousness by the British media, is that the two aircraft carriers have been plagued with endless technical and mechanical issues as long as they’ve been in service. Flooding, mid-operation breakdowns, onboard fires, and engine leaks are routine. Both vessels have spent considerably more time docked and under repair than at sea over their brief lifetimes. In 2020, an entire HMS Prince of Wales crew accommodation block collapsed, for reasons unclear.

As the elite US foreign policy journal National Interest acknowledged in March 2024, “the Royal Navy remains unable to adequately defend or operate” its two carriers “independently” - code for the Empire being consistently compelled to deploy its own naval and air assets to support the pair. This is quite some failure, given British officials originally intended for the vessels to not only lead NATO exercises and deployments, but “slot into” US navy operations wherever and whenever necessary.

The Empire’s inability to outsource its hegemonic duties to Britain has created a critical “carrier gap”. Despite maintaining an 11-strong fleet, Washington cannot deploy the vessels to every global flashpoint at once, grievously undermining her power and influence at a time of tremendous upheaval worldwide. In a bitter irony, by encouraging and facilitating London’s emulation of its own flawed and outdated reliance on aircraft carriers, the US has inadvertently birthed yet another needy imperial dependent, further draining its already fatally overstretched military resources. 

Several Royal Navy destroyers were originally part of abortive US-led Operation Prosperity Guardian, launched in late 2023 to smash Ansar Allah’s righteous anti-genocide Red Sea blockade. Almost immediately, it became apparent the British lacked any ability to fire on land targets, therefore rendering their participation completely useless. Subsequently, photos emerged of areas on Britain’s ships where land attack cruise missiles should’ve been situated. Instead, the spaces were occupied by humble treadmills, for use as on-board gyms.

It transpired that the appropriate weapons hadn’t been purchased, due to a lack of funds - the money having of course been spent instead on constructing barely operable aircraft carriers, which now face summary defenestration. By investing incalculable time, energy, and money in pursuing the mythological greatness associated with carrier capability, Britain - just like the US Empire - now finds itself unable to meet modern warfare’s most basic challenges. Meanwhile, its adversaries near and far have remorselessly innovated, equipping themselves for 21st century battle.

Days after The Times portended the impending death of London’s aircraft carriers, mainstream media became awash with reports of savage cutbacks in Britain’s military capabilities, in advance of a new strategic defence review. Five Royal Navy warships, all of which had lain disused due to staffing issues and structural decay for some time, were among the first announced “casualties”. What if anything will replace these losses isn’t certain, although it likely won’t be an aircraft carrier.

The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect Al Mayadeen’s editorial stance.
  • aircraft carrier
  • HMS Prince of Wales
  • British Royal Navy
  • HMS Queen Elizabeth
  • Kit Klarenberg
  • Britain
  • United Kingdom
  • British Empire
Kit Klarenberg

Kit Klarenberg

Investigative journalist.

Most Read

All
For now, Tehran waits in silence, but it waits on its own terms. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Zeinab el-Hajj)

Ceasefire without terms: Iran’s strategic deterrence in shadow of 9,379 kg

  • Opinion
  • 27 Jun 2025
How is it that the Western regimes, which claimed to support the fake revolutions of Lebanon, Libya, and Syria, waged constant war against the actual Ansar Allah-led revolution in Yemen? (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Batoul Chamas)

Understanding Yemen 1/2: The Revolution

  • Opinion
  • 30 Jun 2025
The crusade is well underway, 20 months and counting, 77 years and counting. The conflation should be crystalline.  (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Batoul Chamas)

Which hedge fund owns this sea?

  • Blog
  • 25 Jun 2025
Though the Taleban are not actually waging any war at the moment, like the Ukrainians/NATO and the Zionists/US-UK-EU, they share the same seedbed and are ultimately being used for the same purpose. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Zeinab el-Hajj)

The Ukrainisation of Afghanistan

  • Opinion
  • 26 Jun 2025

Coverage

All
War on Iran

More from this writer

All
USAID Leaks: Censorship As Regime Change

USAID Leaks: Censorship As Regime Change

Spying for enemies: Beware ‘intergovernmental’ organizations

Spying for enemies: Beware ‘intergovernmental’ organizations

At the time of Vanunu’s whistleblowing, Western governments and intelligence agencies had been aware of "Israel’s" development of nuclear weapons for almost three decades. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Mahdi Rtail)

Hidden history: How 'Israel' acquired nukes

It may well be due to the longstanding relationship between MI6 and HTS, via Inter Mediate, that Britain was the first Western country to recognise their assumption of government in Syria. (Al Mayadeen English; Illustrated by Zeinab El-Hajj)

How MI6 helped HTS seize Syria

Al Mayadeen English

Al Mayadeen is an Arab Independent Media Satellite Channel.

All Rights Reserved

  • x
  • Privacy Policy
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Authors
Android
iOS