Hiking with the family in Poland recently, I came across a file of young men and women moving purposefully through the woods.
Camouflage-clad, encased in body armour and toting locally-manufactured assault rifles, they looked as if they meant business.
I learnt later they were part-time volunteers – members of the country’s 40,000 strong territorial force.
My first thought was that if I were Vladimir Putin, I would think long and hard before taking on Poland’s highly motivated and well-equipped military.
A high-powered team led by former Nato boss Lord Robertson is currently conducting a ‘strategic defence review’ to set government policy for the coming years
The Poles aim to build the strongest army in Europe by 2035 and are making the services an attractive career option for young recruits, offering pay and conditions that easily competes with Civvy Street. They have learned well the old Roman maxim that if you want peace, prepare for war.
It is a truth we seem to have forgotten in Britain. The shocking state of our unpreparedness was brought home with a bang yesterday with the news that the Army is expected to have fewer than 70,000 trained soldiers next year – the lowest number in uniform for 200 years.
Within the dwindling ranks, the mood is bleak. A survey by the MoD found that the number of servicemen and women rating their morale as ‘low’ has increased for the third year in a row, up from 42 per cent in 2021, to a disconcerting 58 per cent today.
As for all the admiration and warm words by successive governments for our Armed Forces, when it comes to matching resources to rhetoric, our military continues to get overlooked. Spending on defence stands at 2.3 per cent of GDP with a commitment to rise to 2.5 per cent as and when the economy allows. Compare that to the nearly 5 per cent the Poles aim to hit next year.
It took the pressures of war and the genius of the Duke of Wellington to shape Britain’s then shambolic military into the force that eventually crushed Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815
The grim state of affairs should surprise no-one who knows their British history. Down the centuries, governments have repeatedly celebrated the end of conflicts by running down the military – a fact they come to regret when the next war breaks out.
So it was that when France declared war on Britain in 1793 at the beginning of a conflict that would last more than 20 years, the Army was in no condition to fight.
Ten years of peace following defeat in the American War of Independence had seen numbers slump to just 36,500. The system was corrupt and hopelessly disorganised and, then as now, recruitment was a problem.
It took the pressures of war and the genius of the Duke of Wellington to shape this shambles into the force that eventually crushed Napoleon at Waterloo in 1815.
But the pattern would be repeated again and again. Following victory against Germany in 1918, David Lloyd George’s government sought to recoup the huge costs of the struggle by slashing defence spending. The RAF, then the largest air force in the world, was cut from 280 squadrons to 30.
In 1919, under the ‘Ten Year Rule’, the services were told to draft annual spending estimates on the assumption that there would be no big war in the coming decade.
The rule was dropped in 1932 but the drastic cuts caused the First Sea Lord Sir Frederick Field to complain that in the event of a war the Navy could not keep open the sea lanes on which the British economy depended, nor adequately defend the ports.
A frantic catch-up ensued as Hitler’s intentions became clear during the 1930s – but when the storm broke in 1939, Britain was once again unprepared, under-equipped and undermanned.
This mindset is shaped by our history and our geography. As a maritime power, we have never had much use for large standing armies and have smugly relied on the sea to protect us from rapacious neighbours.
Unlike continental nations, we have no memory of the horrors of invasion and occupation and even with Putin on the rampage, there is no real sense of threat. Warnings of the sort issued earlier this year by the former head of the Army General Sir Patrick Sanders that UK should brace itself for a possible war with Russia fall largely on deaf ears.
It will take a major escalation by the Kremlin to shake that complacency. Britain has not been engaged in a shooting war since 2014 when combat troops began to withdraw from Afghanistan.
With public interest in the services fitful, the defence budget presents a juicy target for Treasury cost-cutters without too much risk of political blowback.
Yet, just as in 1793, 1914 and 1939, we are at a dangerous moment. Across the services, numbers are haemorrhaging along with morale and capacity. Britain’s ability to respond to crises, looming and unseen, is perilously low.
The Mail has called for the armed forces’ numbers to be boosted and for increases in military spending as part of its ‘Don’t Leave Britain Defenceless’ campaign. (Recruits undergo training at Commando Training Centre)
The Mail’s Don’t Leave Britain Defenceless campaign has played an important role in raising awareness but more needs to be done.
Every year, attracting recruits becomes harder and harder, with more people leaving all branches than joining. The Navy and Royal Marines are hard-hit, with a 22 per cent drop in intake from 2022 to 2023.
This is a problem that can at least partly be solved by money. For that reason, Prime Minister Keir Starmer must junk the current vague promise to increase spending ‘when conditions allow’ and offer a clear timetable.
The gloom that lies over our barracks and bases is at least partly a result of poor wages and squalid housing.
Conditions must be adjusted to match today’s expectations. It is no wonder that the Navy is struggling to get takers when service can mean long absences from family and friends.
Last month, a Vanguard-class sub returned home to Faslane after spending more than six months patrolling under water with virtually no contact with the outside world.
Young men and – particularly women – have to be persuaded that the military offers an environment that meets their aspirations and outlook, and gives them room for a life that is much closer to the civilian norm than was the case in the past.
To do that there needs to be a fundamental shift in the way that the military is looked at by the rest of society and the way that it sees itself.
A high-powered team led by former Nato boss Lord George Robertson is currently conducting a ‘strategic defence review’ to set government policy for the coming years.
One of its fundamental concerns should be to re-establish the connection between civilians and our brave men and women in uniform, giving them their proper place in the national consciousness.
Currently the armed services are virtually invisible in everyday life. We are a long way from 2007 when crowds lined the streets of Royal Wootton Basset to honour the dead being flown into nearby RAF Lyneham from Afghanistan.
The dubious and unsatisfactory outcomes of Britain’s Afghan and Iraq adventures have tarnished faith in the purpose of the military. That perception needs to be corrected. In these times more than ever, we need the kind of strong, confident Armed Forces, sure of themselves and their mission, that I saw that day in Poland.
- Patrick Bishop is a historian and former war correspondent. His Paris ’44: The Shame And The Glory is out now.
