Search

politics.co.uk

What's Britain's place in the new world order?

Wed Jul 01 11:44AM
The respected IPPR think tank has published a report on Britain's defence status in a volatile geo-political climate.

By Alex Stevenson

Focusing on Trident's future merely scratches the surface of the commission on national security's final report. It promises something much grander: a fundamental revision of the world order, and Britain's place in it.

At the heart of the assumptions in this report, hashed out across two painstaking years, is a pragmatism offering a radical reassessment of our defence priorities for the 21st century.

Its vision is of a nation threatened as much as by climate change as it is by armies. Nuclear proliferation and the perils of international terrorism loom as large as 20th century atomic armageddon. Swine flu and cybercrime offer threats as intangible as the guns of the last 100 years were brutally real.

There are ways and means of addressing these shifts, of course. The government's updated national security strategy, announced last week, is testament to that.
Yet the report wants to go much, much further. It is fundamentally dissatisfied with the status quo. And it has the crucial insight to realise that finite resources mean tough choices have to be made.

Part of its frustration with the existing set-up is the lack of organisation in matching Britain's responses to security risks to the reality. That's why a national security council is sought, a way of rationalising all government efforts under the umbrella of a single body.
Another element is its hostility towards maintaining the outdated cold war model of defence focusing solely on conventional armed forces. "We're no longer living in the context of the old cold war," commission co-chairman Paddy Ashdown urged.

Britain needs much more than the capability to fight the sorts of wars it has fought for centuries. Aircraft carriers, for example, fall heavily under the microscope. As Charles Guthrie, a former chief of the defence staff, put it: "How good are aircraft carriers at chasing Somali pirates in shallow waters in the Gulf of Aden?"

This, therefore, is the context within which the Trident question must be aired.

"We are not saying we should scrap Trident," IPPR deputy chair Ian Kearns explained. "We do say we should look at it again and... consider all options for a minimum possible deterrent."

As co-chair George Robertson put it: "It's a question of spending more effectively. This is a time for urgent action and hard choices."

There is no need for any action to be taken to renew Britain's nuclear deterrent until 2014; but that is the timeframe the commission is currently operating on.
If it gets its way and succeeds in influencing the manifestoes for parties fighting the next national election, the most pressing need will be the next strategic defence review.

Here is a key goal, however: it is a strategic security review which the report demands is necessary. Only this holistic approach will give the government the utility it needs to effectively make a real difference.

David Omand, a former permanent secretary in the Home Office, knows more than most the importance of this. He's worried by the ability of government to make the right decisions. "The Cabinet secretary has to have somebody by his side who can devote the time to bringing together all these different interests," he said.

The commission is strong on the bureaucratic solutions needed to combat the rise of the security challenge in coming years. On the wider context within which Britain is operating, however, it has the benefit of Lord Ashdown's experience to articulate an imposing prospect for the next few decades.

"I suspect we are seeing the beginning of the end of nearly 600 years of western power, western values and western institutions," he said, suggesting Iraq and Afghanistan could be the last military interventions mustered solely by western states.

"We are going to have different priorities in a multipolar world, and so is the United States. If we're going to do things in the world, we're going to have to reach out."

With severe constraint on defence spending expected, the IPPR report is brutally realistic about the expanded needs of security issues.

"To paraphrase Clausewitz," Lord Ashdown finished, "'this is no longer an issue which can be left to the generals'."

Comments21 - 30 of 224

  1. Britian has a place within the new world order it's just that it's changed. When I was a young school boy I had a scoolboys handbook which had a map showing the British Empire, boy how could such a little country with so few people control so much of the world !!. Like it or not people from the old empire we brought order, education and justice to many of your countries, unfortunately by force. We may have done some pretty bad things but the good we did far outways the bad. This and any future governments priority is the protection of the BRITISH ISLES, not meddling in other countries. Unfortunatley this government has BANKRUPTED the MoD by so much that the Armed Forces couldn't even protect this island. Don't believe what the government spin doctors tell you. The sad fact is without giving any secrets away it's normal for the Royal Navy to have ONE PATROL CRAFT deployed to protect the whole British Isles, the Royal Airforce have about 20 fighters and the Army relies on the part time (god bless em) Territorials.

    Our new place within the new world is to ADVISE and ASSIST and thats it !!!!

    ajulianmoore From ajulianmoore on Wed Jul 01 01:29PM

    Report abuse

  2. Labour, Conservative, LIB, UKIP, EU & the BBC = NWO
    Obvious

    stupot06 From stupot06 on Wed Jul 01 01:30PM

    Report abuse

  3. If Charles Guthrie had any idea what an aircraft carrier was he would realise that they did not need to chase pirates around the Gulf of Aden - they stand off out to sea and let their aircraft do the chasing. They can also provide vital air cover to the troops he once commanded when they get into sticky situations. Perhaps he needs to be reminded of the number of times the navy has had to haul the army out of the mess they seem so adept at getting themselves into - Dunkirk, Crete, etc. etc. He may also like to present his ideas on how he would have recovered the Falklands without the Navy's help - perhaps his troops are particularly good swimmers and of course once they got there they would not have had any need for the Navy's Sea Harriers - or would they?

    holland803 From holland803 on Wed Jul 01 01:33PM

    Report abuse

  4. Britains place in the ''New World Order'' the lap dog of America, or a vassel state of E.U. Hve we a choice? well emmigration perhaps.

    parrott180 From parrott180 on Wed Jul 01 01:40PM

    Report abuse

  5. We don't need the big ships and the nuclear weapons anymore, we should accept the fact that since the end of WW2 we are no longer a major player on the world scene and we have been massively overtaken by the USA, Russia, China and in a few years even India. We shouldn't over commit to other conflicts just to look big in the eyes of the rest of the world. We no longer have an Empire to supply the masses of fighting men needed for these operations. We can't even supply our troops with the right equipment for the job and give them decent houses to live in. I know a pilot just back from Afghanistan and he says his helicopter is regularly in for repair but there is no word of replacements being shipped out, it's just make do and mend. Why should we continue to be seen as the bete noir by other countries just to boost political egos? Let's face it in the eyes of these countries we are just America's lapdog. I know guys who served in Bosnia who were reduced to scrounging kit off the Americans just to out on patrol and it would appear nothing has changed. Unless the govt. is prepared and willing to commit funds to buy the right equipment for the job what's the point in getting involved? We need politicians to think things out and not just get involved because it looks good on our worls cv.

    maliblues90 From maliblues90 on Wed Jul 01 01:42PM

    Report abuse

  6. We don't need the big ships and the nuclear weapons anymore, we should accept the fact that since the end of WW2 we are no longer a major player on the world scene and we have been massively overtaken by the USA, Russia, China and in a few years even India. We shouldn't over commit to other conflicts just to look big in the eyes of the rest of the world. We no longer have an Empire to supply the masses of fighting men needed for these operations. We can't even supply our troops with the right equipment for the job and give them decent houses to live in. I know a pilot just back from Afghanistan and he says his helicopter is regularly in for repair but there is no word of replacements being shipped out, it's just make do and mend. Why should we continue to be seen as the bete noir by other countries just to boost political egos? Let's face it in the eyes of these countries we are just America's lapdog. I know guys who served in Bosnia who were reduced to scrounging kit off the Americans just to out on patrol and it would appear nothing has changed. Unless the govt. is prepared and willing to commit funds to buy the right equipment for the job what's the point in getting involved? We need politicians to think things out and not just get involved because it looks good on our worls cv.

    maliblues90 From maliblues90 on Wed Jul 01 01:43PM

    Report abuse

  7. Britain was a global power in the past but it is now time to recognise that we are in decline, and to prevent things getting worse, we have to step back and sort ourselves out before others.
    Together with the others in the EU we will have a powerful voice, and we can stop trying to police the world ourselves using money we havent got.

    rosslynglassman From rosslynglassman on Wed Jul 01 01:50PM

    Report abuse

  8. Terrorists both physical and cyber will have the largest effect on this country and what point is Trident or a fleet of aircraft carriers?? When the average Russian/Chinese computer kid see themselevs as a patriot and the West as evil we have to start defending ourselves. Over there it is illegal to hack the state or internally but the west if fair game and all but encouraged by the state.
    .
    We have no coherent defense against hackers and yet our whole way of life/economy rests on computers. Thank goodness for Lord Ashdown intervention.

    jason.web28 From jason.web28 on Wed Jul 01 01:56PM

    Report abuse

  9. In the new world order we are under attack from within our own country.
    We have a virtual sign up that says in effect," WELCOME TO BRITIAN AND IT'S PROTECTION OF EXTREMISTS WHO ARE WANTED CRIMINALS IN THIER OWN COUNTRIES.
    WELCOME TO LIVE OUR SECURITY BENEFITS WHILST YOU CONTINUE YOUR WAR ON EVERYONE WHO DOES NOT BELEIVE EXACTLY AS YOURSELVES, INCLUDING YOUR HOSTS AND PROTECTERS" since the days of Michael Howard as Foreign Secretary each government has betrayed the majority of people this country. None of the major three political parties will even debate the causes and remedies. If we are looking at budget limitations, we should be looking more at policies than arms. Britain is one worst of the states in the world that harbour international terrorists. That is a massive shift in our position in the world order!

    oiltar From oiltar on Wed Jul 01 02:03PM

    Report abuse

  10. We once were warriors, as they say, now we are over-fed, ill-educated complacent whiners, most of whom couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag if there was conscription today. When we had empire, yes we did some bad things, as did most other cultures, America (and us to a lesser degree) had slaves, as did the Muslims and the ancient Egyptians, Romans, Greeks, etc. (and slavery is still rife in some parts of Africa and Asia). Don't even get me started on human trafficking. Since the end of WW2, successive governments have dismantled our education systems and made the majority of people thick and dependent on benefits. Hardly any of them have the get up and go, no guts no glory mentality of the plucky people who lived on this lush green isle during the war. The main people with any gumption are immigrants, who will have bred themselves into a majority in a generation or so, then it is their turn to make the laws, Sharia or otherwise? Buddhists might be nice? Apart from us and America, other countries tend to do what they like in their National interests as they believe charity begins at home. There has always been and always will be a conspiracy of wealthy cartels manipulating the world behind the scenes. The thing is we see this now and a lot of us saw it coming, in another generation or so, the young will be asking why they were never warned? Maybe because it wasn't announced in the Diary Room of Big Brother, perhaps?

    misterfeegs From misterfeegs on Wed Jul 01 02:03PM

    Report abuse

Comment on this article

Please sign in to add your comments.


Add to my Yahoo/RSS

Latest UK news

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! All rights reserved.

Notice: We collect personal information on this site. To learn more about how we use your information, see our: Updated Privacy Policy