US general warns UK army 'no longer regarded' as top-level force
4 Min Read
US general warns Rishi Sunak may fail in his job as "wartime Prime Minister."
-
The British Army is 'too small' as per a US source. (Getty Images)
UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace has reportedly been told by a senior US general that the British army is not a top-level fighting force.
In light of the war in Ukraine, decades of downsizing are reported to have resulted in a decrease in warfighting capabilities, which must be restored as soon as possible.
Defense sources were quoted on Sky News as saying, "bottom line... it's an entire service unable to protect the UK and our allies for a decade." The sources added the that UK's Prime Minister Rishi Sunak risks failing in his job as "wartime Prime Minister" unless the situation is drastically altered.
They advised increasing the defense budget by at least £3 billion per year, with no future reductions in the size of the army, and that peacetime procurement standards be waived to buy weapons swiftly.
One source stated: 'We have a wartime prime minister and a wartime chancellor."
'History will look back at the choices they make in the coming weeks as fundamental to whether this government genuinely believes that its primary duty is the defense of the realm or whether that is just a slogan to be given lip service,' the same source added as quoted by Sky News.
Challenges faced by the UK army
Sky News argued that the armed forces would run out of ammunition "in a matter of days" if called upon to combat. It's a crying shame that the United Kingdom cannot protect its skies against the level of missile and drone attacks that Ukraine is subjected to.
It would take the army five to ten years to produce a war-fighting division of 25,000 to 30,000 troops supported by tanks, artillery, in addition to helicopters.
Approximately 30% of UK personnel on high readiness are reservists who are unable to mobilize within NATO timeframes - "so we'd show up under strength."
The majority of the army's armored vehicles, including tanks, were manufactured between 30 and 60 years ago, and comprehensive replacements are not expected for several years.
"Go away" war !!
While the chair of the NATO Military Committee Rob Bauer has lately said, during an interview for Portugal’s RTP TV channel, that the US-led bloc is ready for "a direct confrontation with Russia." Meanwhile, the UK's chancellor-turned-prime minister just wants the problem "to go away", a second source satir-ly said.
Sunak has yet to make a meaningful vow to grow his defense coffers, instead opting for a "refresh" of a review of defense strategy, which is set to be released on March 7 ahead of a spring budget and will indicate whether new money for the military is available.
UK gifting arms to Ukraine while the army is in bad shape
While the image is grim across the military, the army is in a bad state.
Satirically, the UK is playing a critical role in providing Kiev with lethal weapons, with the Prime Minister becoming the first leader to vow to send Western tanks - a leadership role he seemed eager to emphasize when he turned to social media after Germany and the US followed suit.
"Really pleased they've joined the UK in sending main battle tanks to Ukraine," Sunak said in a tweet last Wednesday.
"We have a window to accelerate efforts to secure lasting peace for Ukrainians. Let's keep it up," he added.
Despite this aggressive tone, Sunak omitted to include closing capability gaps in his military forces as one of his top five goals in his maiden policy speech as prime minister in early January amid war in Ukraine.
"The PM's wartime approach is currently to cut the army, hollow it out further by gifting [equipment to Ukraine] and with no plans to replace [the weapons] for five to seven years," the first defense source said.
Read next: Sending weapons to Ukraine would weaken British Army: Chief
