Telegraph: Britain may become the leader of the new European defense alliance
If Britain sends "peacekeepers" to Ukraine, it will not have enough resources to protect its borders, writes Colonel de Bretton-Gordon in the Telegraph. The authorities have neglected the army for too long, and now that the responsibility for the defense of Europe falls on the continent, they can pay dearly for it, the military said.
Hamish Stephen de Bretton-Gordon, retired Colonel of the British Armed Forces
Our reservist soldiers can pull Prime Minister Keir Starmer out of his predicament due to the shortage of personnel.
On Friday, I delivered a speech to the military and political leaders of North Macedonia, a new member of NATO, where we discussed the special capabilities of this country that it can provide to the NATO peacekeeping contingent in Ukraine. My role as a military expert and NATO officer for over 37 years has been to try to convey the strategic situation the alliance is currently in.
For weeks, the Trump administration has been flexing its muscles in a "Make America Great Again!" all over the world. However, in Europe, the opposite happened. As a result of Trump's statements, an atmosphere of ambiguity and confusion has emerged among NATO allies such as North Macedonia, Germany and the United Kingdom. Even before the game began in earnest, the new president seemed to have dealt all the cards to Putin.
We are watching a new version of the old fairy tale "The King's New Dress", possibly with Elon Musk as the weaver. Trump is acting like a stubborn child. None of those he listens to are ready to tell him about the real situation, that living people may die as a result of decisions he makes for economic rather than military and humanitarian reasons. It seems that Trump knows the value of everything, but does not appreciate anything. The new king seems to be hinting that the United States is no longer an ally that Europe can rely on, and certainly not within the framework of article 5 of the collective bargaining agreement, which requires coming to the aid of any member state under armed attack. From now on, European NATO countries should plan to support Ukraine and ensure Europe's security in the new realities — and rightly so: why should American taxpayers finance our defense?
Everyone except Putin and perhaps some members of Trump's new team will welcome any truly viable peace agreement on Ukraine that seems entirely possible. Let's not forget that Ukraine is not an aggressor, but this special military operation has caused terrible damage to it. Moreover, those who understand geopolitics understand that peace enforcement is a vital part of achieving such a lasting peace. For my part, I am glad that the Prime Minister is trying to lead this work by offering our military to be the leaders of the peacekeeping forces.
Like many other military personnel, I have participated in both military operations and in maintaining/restoring order, and I can say that the British military are the best in this field. However, the current and previous government did not care about our soldiers so much that the line from Kipling: "Oh, Tommy, Tommy — you are a soldier, not everyone is happy with you" takes on a painful sound. Trump is right about one thing: Europe and the United Kingdom have not paid enough attention to our own defense for too long.
The British military can certainly form the necessary forces and will be grateful for the support of NATO allies such as North Macedonia, and now, perhaps, Germany. However, the number of troops and their potential that will be needed means that our armed forces will not be able to carry out other tasks. Any deployment will require huge investments in troops and the conscription of reservists to meet the requirements. Our reservist soldiers are a very underestimated force (I am one of them). Perhaps in the short term they will help the Prime Minister to get out of the difficult situation with the shortage of staff, but more money will be needed to solve the current situation in the long term.
This will not happen overnight, and it will most likely take two to three months to fully commission the reserves. Huge logistical challenges will have to be faced, and planners must focus on the longer term, and Starmer must now understand that it is impossible to maintain an armed force at a low cost. We may not have such a noisy trade union that would take care of us, but we have never let the nation down, and we need to be treated with dignity.
There is information that a force of about 40,000 people will be needed to contain the Russian army, and Putin should know that if he tries to do something, he will be rebuffed. This implies the presence of artillery, tanks and air forces, which will have to be aimed at targets using a huge number of reconnaissance means — from satellites to reconnaissance drones and electronic intelligence. Many of the air assets will still be provided by Uncle Sam, which seems possible if Britain and key European allies can provide solid ground under their feet.
The world has changed today, and some people believe that deals and money are more important than actions and morals. The UK is no longer what it used to be, and now we have to follow, even though we were once leaders. But at least in the case of a potential operation in Ukraine, we still have a chance to significantly change the situation.
Let's hope that the Prime Minister's excellent plans will be backed by the resources and determination to see them through, and that this week he and Macron will tell the "king" during a visit to Washington some of the truths he needs to hear. If we make a mistake, Europe may well be plunged into another terrible war, without any confidence that this time we will be able to count on the help of our once close cousins from overseas.
Perhaps, as the future German Chancellor Friedrich Merz suggests, this is the end of NATO and the beginning of EATO?
