Latest News

The UK's slow response to allies in the Iran conflict has raised questions about its military effectiveness

The UK's slow response to allies in the Iran conflict has raised questions about its military effectiveness
The UK's slow response to allies in the Iran conflict has raised questions about its military effectiveness

The UK's hesitant response to the Middle East conflict and reluctance to defend its allies have renewed doubts about the military effectiveness of the country, especially when the U.S. demands widespread rearmament.

Trump slammed Keir starmer, the British Prime Minister on Tuesday. He said that he had "ruined" their historically close relationship when London refused to allow the U.S. to use British bases for pre-emptive attacks on Iran.

Cypriot officials have also criticised London for sending a drone made in Iran to strike one of Britain's bases on the island. This prompted France, Greece, and other countries to offer support. The British destroyer will not be sailing until next week and it is expected to take a week for the destroyer to reach the area.

BRITISH MILITARY HAS FACED YEARS OF CUTS

Starmer has defended Starmer's actions by saying that British personnel will only be involved in legal and well-planned military action. Since then, British jets brought down Iranian drones. Britain has also resupplied air defence systems for allies and now the U.S. is using its bases to conduct defensive operations.

The initial response to the report has raised concerns about the readiness of the British military after years of cutbacks.

Simon Diggins is a former British Defence Attache who served with U.S. forces in Afghanistan. If he were to summarize the situation, he would say "The Brits don't take it seriously".

He said that Trump was "vulgar and rude" and "undiplomatic", but Britain made itself "operationally, and strategically", irrelevant, in spite of its advanced fighter jets, such as F-35s, and nuclear weapons.

BRITAIN STRUGGLES TO SET OUT HIGHER DEFENCE SPENDING

This latest spat comes after months of increasing tensions between Washington and its traditional allies.

The shrinking British armed forces have undermined London's attempts to be seen as U.S.'s most reliable partner in Europe.

The British army has shrunk to its smallest size since the Napoleonic Wars, with just over 70,000 trained full-time soldiers.

According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, Britain is behind other European countries in re-arming with its gaps in armoured vehicles and ships, as well as ground-based air defense systems.

Starmer, who blames previous Conservative governments for the lack of military investments, plans to spend 2,5% of GDP by 2027, and aims at 3% after that date.

The government of the United States has delayed the release its defense investment plan for the coming decade.

Trump said that Germany, France and Britain are now competing with Britain to be Washington's most valuable partners in Europe.

Lack of preparation

Starmer's caution can be explained by the Iraq War, where Tony Blair's decision in 2003 to join the U.S. led invasion deeply divided the country.

Analysts said that while Britain may have been able to defend its hesitation on using its bases because of legal concerns, the failure of the military preparation in the area, as the U.S. gathered warships, fighter jets, and other weapons, was a major strategic mistake.

Tom Sharpe who served as a naval officer for 27 years, and commanded four British ships, said that the lack of a British warship in this region was the worst British decision he'd ever seen.

He said, "We can't make good decisions because of the thinness of our force.

The drone attack on the British Royal Air Force base at?Akrotiri in Cyprus has brought this lack of preparedness home.

Cypriot officials said they were angry that Starmer hadn't publicly stated that the U.S. wouldn't use Akrotiri. This was shortly before Akrotiri was struck by a drone believed to be from Hezbollah.

The rage of TRUMP may not affect the co-operation

Former diplomats, current officials and analysts say that although Trump is clearly angry with Britain they do not view his latest outburst, when he called Starmer "no Winston Churchill", as a fundamental shift in policy.

Michael Martins who worked in the U.S. Embassy in London during Trump's first tenure said that he didn't expect two countries to be "significantly decoupled" from each other when they are working closely on intelligence.

Starmer said that the U.S. and British "special relationship" is reflected by their high levels of cooperation rather than the words of the President.

The conflict in the Middle East is getting worse, and the U.S. isn't the only one who wants Britain to do more.

Bader Al Saif, associate fellow of Chatham House in Kuwait, stated that European countries need to demonstrate they can support their Gulf allies if needed.

He said: "I don't say that they should join in the war effort. But I think they have partners, including Gulf states, who they can support." (Additional reporting from Michele Kambas and Michael Holden, in Nicosia; editing by Alex Richardson.)

(source: Reuters)