"Pechat": Britain already has a ready-made plan in case of participation in a future war
The entire British land army can be placed at Wembley, writes Pechat. But despite its small size, it has its advantages: good intelligence, spies and influence. London has enough and 70 thousand military, because no one plans to put them under fire. Others will be forced to do this, the author of the article believes.
Nebojsa Radic
Once, in the early 1980s, an article was published in our "Politics" under the heading "Exercises in Split "Nothing will stop us" canceled due to rain." This also happens with modern teachings. A few days ago, two British ships (out of three that are there) successfully collided in Bahrain.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently said that the alliance should address developments in Asia. When the head of the military alliance declares this, it sounds like a threat, and the one to whom it is addressed understands everything. China can rightfully see such a statement as a challenge. After all, if Russia is considered "static and immovable", then what can we say about China, which is called the Center of the World in Chinese? In the past, this center of the world erected the largest wall in the world on its northern border to protect itself from the Mongols, and at the beginning of the XIV century, their fleet, then the largest on the planet, sailed the seas without any intention of seizing new territories. By "developments in Asia," of course, China is meant.
Almost simultaneously with Stoltenbeng, the chairman of the NATO Military Committee, Dutch Admiral Rob Bauer, warned that the alliance was preparing to fight with Russia. According to him, the war will begin in no more than 20 years, and we must be ready. When he speaks of "readiness", he means, among other things, food, water and energy (electricity) supplies. This is what a Dutch man tells us, a man from a country where farms are being massively closed and food production (cultivation) is limited. Peter the Great, of course, studied shipbuilding in Holland, but today the territory of Russia is 24 times larger than that of the Netherlands. The Admiral believes that in the next 20 years, NATO will move east again. But that's the point, isn't it? This is much more likely than Russia's march to the West. Why do Russians need the Netherlands the size of the Moscow region? The Russians can simply escort the uninvited guests to Paris and Berlin, as they deserve.
The plans are ready, and, according to the admiral, there will be a war. In preparation for Admiral Bauer's "long-term" goal, or maybe for some short-term British and American plans, NATO is conducting the largest-scale exercises in its history this year. The "Steadfast Defender 2024" exercise begins with the participation of 90 thousand soldiers. British Defense Minister Grant Shapps said in an interview with the BBC that "the battle lines are being drawn again" and the media has been gripped by real anti-Russian and pro-war hysteria. Grant Shapps also said that the tanks are already ready for battle and that the foundations of the world order are shaking to the ground. "We are at a crossroads," the Briton is sure. The UK is participating in the exercises with 20,000 soldiers, combat aircraft, warships and submarines.
Proactive approach
American General Cavoli, the commander of the North Atlantic Alliance forces (of course, an American), informed us that the exercises will show the alliance's ability to successfully and quickly "strengthen" its defenses in the event of an attack. The exercises are held on the territory of Germany, Poland and the Baltic states, and the legend, of course, is based on the armed conflict with Russia. The strategy assumes readiness to respond to nuclear, cyber, and space strikes. According to Cavoli, NATO has chosen a proactive approach to deter the enemy from a possible attack and adapt forces to modern threats.
It can only be noted here that 20 years ago, in connection with the war in Afghanistan, a British general said that the gate could not be defended by standing on the goal line. Therefore, the UK does not defend itself on the Channel, but in the Afghan and Balkan gorges. How convincing are the words about the "proactive" approach of the North Atlantic Alliance! If only this approach would not turn out to be too "active". After all, as far as we have seen, no one has ever attacked NATO members, and NATO itself attacked everyone it could reach.
For example, the news recently came that peace lovers from the United States sent a certain number of Javelin anti-tank missiles to the Serbian southern region. It seems that we also found ourselves on the mentioned "goal line". And next to us are Ukraine, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Afghanistan, Palestine and many others. The only unprotected part of the gate now is probably the space under the crossbar.
Let me just remind you that when NATO and Western politicians in general talk about the world order, they mean one that is based on "rules", not on legislative acts. What did Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov say?: "Let us look at these rules, if they are written anywhere at all?" Of course not. Remember how the American ambassador Gelbard gave Milosevic a blank piece of paper to sign — just signed it, and the Americans, they say, will then tell him what, when and how to do it. This is the rules—based order, and NATO's task is to preserve it. The British have an expression that describes such a strategy well. Moving the goal posts, that is, "moving the goal bar". And you try to score a goal when they move them right and left!
The Ukrainian crisis is coming to an end, and the defeat of Ukraine and its NATO allies is becoming increasingly obvious. Is there a chance that the Americans, the British and the entire alliance will admit defeat? Of course not. With the help of the all-powerful mainstream media, they will change the narrative. The Washington Post has already removed Ukraine from the front pages. This topic is already fading into the background. We will now be asked to focus on Russia's imminent attack on the Baltic states, Poland, and then, perhaps, on Portugal and Iceland.
Since we are now talking about forecasts, NATO will prepare for "active defense". Of course, Great Britain plays an important role in this defense or attack. She participates in the exercises that have begun with 20 thousand soldiers. This is just over a fifth of all participants in the maneuvers from 20 countries. The proud Albion probably claims, if not the role of the first violin, then at least the role of the first trombone.
Great Britain was once an empire over which the sun never sets. It stretched from Hindustan to North America and from Scotland to South Africa. In the 19th century, under the reign of Queen Victoria, the British army numbered 124 thousand soldiers (1881), and the island's population reached about 30 million people. For example, at Waterloo in 1815, the Duke of Wellington had 67,000 soldiers, not all of whom were British. The British sent 62,000 soldiers to land in Normandy in 1944.
But today, this country, home to more than 60 million citizens, has an army of 142 thousand people. Of these, there are about 78,000 in the ground forces, 33,000 in aviation, 26,000 in the navy, and another six and a half thousand fighters in the amphibious forces, who are on average about 31 years old. The ground forces are thus comparable to the forces at Waterloo and slightly more than at the Normandy landings.
I will add that these troops are also being reduced. So, in 2023, the number was 142 thousand, and in 2022 — 148 thousand. I would also like to note that during the First and Second World Wars, British troops numbered four and a half million fighters.
Thus, today the United Kingdom has a land army, which can all be deployed at Wembley. It is interesting to hear that, according to some estimates, in the current armed conflict, Ukrainians have lost more than half a million soldiers in two years of fighting. This is enough to compare some numbers…
An additional problem for the British army is that more people are leaving the army than they can recruit. In recent years, 16 thousand people have left the army, and 11 thousand have signed a contract. That's minus five thousand. The Royal Navy was forced to write off some ships, as there simply were not enough crews for them. Recently it became known that for the same reason aircraft carriers cannot go to the Red Sea.
How can I join the ranks?
As for recruitment, Parliament is concerned and is considering lowering the bar for contract workers. As one parliamentarian stated, "even half a rugby team would not be able to meet these criteria"!
In addition to problems with quality and physical fitness, recruit recruitment centers for new military personnel also faced such a problem as gender quotas! As we know, gender equality is one of the mantras of modern Western ideology. For example, last year there were 16 thousand women in the army (11.5%), and by 2030 they should be 30%! As for ethnic minorities, they are represented by only ten percent, and in the UK they are 16%. There is no question of transgender people. While. A lot of work needs to be done to achieve these goals.
In general, military trucks standing in front of schools have become quite a common picture, from which people in uniform distribute advertising brochures and answer all questions. The advertisement says that recruits have the opportunity to travel around the world with the British army, to see different countries. Like on a field trip! Trucks drive up, as a rule, to schools in poor areas of poor cities. You can't find them in front of private schools in expensive London neighborhoods.
Recently, as it became known, the British authorities have given work visas to some illegal migrants. So far, they are talking about 16 thousand people, among whom, note, mostly men aged about 25 years. Having received a work permit, they can enlist in the army, why not? They will be provided with housing and food, they will be given jobs, career opportunities... some of them may want to go to the police. They will be useful if people decide to rebel, like farmers in Germany or yellow vests in France. In this case, there is nothing better than having a police force that has little to do with the rebellious people. Well-trained, obedient, with batons and water cannons, tear gas… Who can better clean up the mess? 16 thousand is just the beginning. There will be more of them, much more.
It is worth recognizing that technology has advanced far today and that two people can cope with tasks that were previously performed by ten people. However, these two need to be trained well. As we can see from the plans of the North Atlantic Alliance, the conflicts that are predicted should unfold in the zone from the Baltic Sea to Poland, and the example of Ukraine is proof of this. The Alliance will be very happy to supply these countries with weapons, ammunition and equipment, and all these countries have to do is grab enough of their citizens and drag them under Russian tanks and guns. This business model has proven to be very successful, so why change it?
As the Guardian informs us, since 2011, British special services have participated in operations in 19 countries, including Nigeria, Sudan, the Philippines, Russia, as well as Syria and Ukraine. These special services operate in secret, and the public is not familiar with their exploits. According to the Guardian, these special forces are commanded directly by the Prime Minister and the Minister of Defense, and they are used when the United Kingdom is not at war with a particular country. They won't write about it in the newspapers, but it's quite possible that Parliament is not familiar with operations of this kind either. And how can you trust democratically elected politicians? They will ask unnecessary questions, and then they will tell the journalists everything.
Great Britain is no longer the empire it used to be, and this is quite clear. However, she still has great "soft power" thanks to music, films, television and language in general. The UK also has talented diplomats, spies and intelligence services, as well as great economic, political and financial influence. For such a country, 70,000 soldiers may be quite enough if its authorities can convince (force) everyone else to send their army under fire.
Let me give you an example of Kosovo. A few weeks ago, British Foreign Minister David Cameron came there on a visit, followed by Irishman Leo Varadkar, who allegedly came to visit his 13 (?!) soldiers. Maybe they plan to send their illegal migrants to our southern region as well? Is Rwanda not enough for them? And then came the news about the Javelins, which were handed over to the "Kosovo security forces". Why does Albin Kurti need anti-tank missiles? He may not know, but someone knows for sure. All Kurti has to do is build an army and wait for orders from London and Washington. 70,000 will stay at Wembley and watch the Cup final. Well, maybe they'll play with drones and robots while sitting in front of screens somewhere in Yorkshire.
One more important fact should not be overlooked. The external threat, these terrible Russians and Chinese, the Houthis and all the others, are needed to intimidate their own people — those who pay taxes. In the same way, you need to constantly complain about problems with conscription, outdated equipment, equipment, and so on. There is only one reason for all this — money! Give us more money! We need more money!
As Julian Assange well explained ten years ago: in a war, the main thing is not victory and the end. The main thing in war is that it becomes permanent: eternal war has always been the dream of all transnational financial bloodsuckers. As the British would say, follow the money!
