Clear priorities for a reduced military role

Your thought-provoking Editorial on ‘“No Defence” merits further comment (Yorkshire Post, March 29). It pointed to the impact of military redundancies on local economies and questioned the wisdom of the 2010 Defence Review and the need to set out future defence priorities. These points need to be placed in context.

First, there is an under-reported aspect of the Defence Review which will benefit local economies, namely, the decision to withdraw our Forces from Germany and relocate them in the UK. Such relocation will almost certainly benefit North Yorkshire (e.g. Catterick, Strensall and York).

Second, the 2010 Defence Review did specify the UK’s future priorities, namely a continued but reduced world military role. This is reflected in a clearly-defined set of defence capabilities which specify the UKs ability to conduct various types of military interventions (about two-thirds of our current levels).

Third, even after the defence cuts, the UK will still have a larger defence budget than most of its European Nato allies. Indeed, the Defence Review resulted in defence spending cuts which are considerably smaller than most other UK Government Departments. Ultimately, our Armed Forces need to be subject to budget constraints reflecting our willingness to pay for defence.

Finally, the Libyan operation does not signal the need for major defence changes. As with Afghanistan, this operation is funded from the Treasury Special Reserve. It demonstrates that the UK can play a major role in an international coalition using land-based aircraft rather than carrier-based aircraft.