Liam fox

Leak shows that Fox objects to plans to spend more on overseas development

A second letter from the Defence Secretary to the Prime Minister has leaked out. Tomorrow’s Times reports on a note that Liam Fox sent to the Prime Minister opposing the government’s plan to legislate for Britain to spend 0.7 percent of gross national income on overseas development aid. It won’t come as a huge surprise to anyone that Dr Fox is sceptical of aid spending. But for another letter from him to the PM to reach the press will further strain relations between the MoD and Downing Street. There will be those in the Cameron circle who think that it is not a coincidence that both of the missives that have leaked out have

How to fix the National Security Council

The National Security Council was a sound idea. But it has disappointed, both inside and outside Whitehall. The Ministry of Defence has complained that it “failed to give strategic direction”. Among previous supporters in the media, Con Coughlin has commented sourly that “all it has achieved so far is the replacement of Blair’s much-derided ‘sofa government’ with a new, back-of-the-envelope approach”. James Kirkup was even driven to ask “What exactly is the point of it?” Where did things go wrong? First, it seems that more effort went into spinning it to the media — it was a ‘War Cabinet’ to Sun readers, an end to ‘sofa government’ to those disaffected

More demands on George Osborne

Is the defence budget the most chaotic in all Whitehall? George Osborne said as much last October — and he’s still dealing with its hellish intricacies now. The main problem, as so often in military matters, is one of overcommitment. Thanks to various accounting ruses on Labour’s part, large parts of the MoD’s costs were hidden in the long grass of the future. It was buy now, pay later — with Brown doing the buying bit, and the coalition doing the paying. The number that William Hague put on it last year was £38 billion. The MoD was spending £38 billion more, over this decade, than had been budgeted. Even

The Poor Bloody Infantry Faces More Friendly Fire?

In opposition Liam Fox boasted he could cut the Ministry of Defence by 25% without there being any impact on “frontline” troops. The confirmation that there will be 17,000 fewer men and women in uniform by this parliament’s end mocks that promise. To govern is to choose, for sure, but the scale of these cuts leads one to wonder, again, what kind of capability will be left once they are completed. For now, the Gurkhas excepted, the infantry has been spared. But there are already indications that its luck, if you can call it that after all the reorganisations of recent years, will run out when the next “tranche” of

Targeting Gaddafi

The press is currently making great play of an apparent difference between General Richard and Liam Fox on whether or not Gaddafi can be targeted. The whole debate flags up one of the absurdities of international legal convention. If it is legitimate to hit a Libyan tank crew moving on Benghazi, why it is not legitimate to target the person who is ultimately giving these orders?     Given the whole nature of the Libyan state, the fastest — and, I would say, most humane — way to end this conflict would be to kill Gaddafi. Anne-Marie Slaughter, until recently the head of policy planning at the State Department, argued

The hunt for Hague’s mojo

All hands to the Defence Select Committee this afternoon, for questions about the nation’s security apparatus. Of course, most onlookers were not remotely interested in the answers. For them, this gathering was convened to see if William Hague might regain his “mojo“. He didn’t get the chance. This was Letwin Hour. Or Letwin’s Two Hours, to be precise. After a difficult fortnight for the government, the brain behind Cameron’s premiership high-jacked proceedings. In insouciant tones, he explained the manifold complexities of the government’s security policy to the committee. Real terms defence spending is likely to increase after the next spending round and Trident will be replaced; both are a response

Keep calm and carry on

The Libya crisis looked like it would prove the critics of the government’s Strategic Defence and Security Review right. Was it not the case that the HMS Cumberland, now seen as crucial for the evacuation of British nationals, would soon be decommissioned. And would the Harriers not prove useful in a potential intervention? Coupled with criticism that the government struggled to handle the evacuation of British nationals, it looked like the makings of a credibility-destroying theme: strategic misjudgement and tactical incompetence. But a week into the crisis, the government’s handling of the evacuation – and response to the Libyan crisis overall – looks increasingly surefooted. The UK has led the

Ashdown goes Fox-hunting

There’s a quite remarkable op-ed by Paddy Ashdown in The Times (£) today which goes public with a lot of the griping about Liam Fox that one heard behind the scenes at the time of the Strategic Defence Review. Ashdown remarks that the ‘problem with the SDSR was not speed, but lack of political direction.’ He then details how ‘Sir David Richards, then head of the Army and now Chief of the Defence Staff, had to bypass the whole process (and his Secretary of State) to appeal to the Prime Minister to avert catastrophe in the Army.’ Before concluding that: ‘The decisions made in the SDSR, with some notable exceptions,

More trouble for the government over the military covenant

The news that serving soldiers have been given notice by email has been met fury from ministers. Liam Fox has answered questions in the House about this story and why 100 RAF pilots discovered they were redundant in yesterday’s newspapers. Fox was both livid and contrite, decrying the ‘completely unacceptable’ practices and reiterating the MoD’s ‘unreserved apologies’. He announced that an internal inquiry has been called, which Patrick Mercer believes will expose negligence among those officers who manage personnel. Fox also conceded that the sacked pilots, many of whom were ‘hours from obtaining qualification’, cannot be retained in some form of volunteer reserve, such is the squeeze on the MoD.

Fox: Iran could have a nuclear weapon by 2012

As Cairo smoulders, it’s easy to forget about one of the most combustible ingredients in the Middle Eastern cocktail – Iran. Yet the threat still exists, as Tony Blair and Liam Fox have been keen to remind us. James Kirkup reports that the Defence Secretary has warned a Commons committee that Iran could have a nuclear device as soon as next year. Fox isn’t the first to make the 2012 claim. The director of the CIA did so last year. And a recent article by the former UN weapons inspector David Albright and Andrea Stricker – which I arrived at via Jeffrey Goldberg – explains just how Iran might pull

The defence review: MK II?

Most of my 2010 predictions did not come to pass; and many of the ones I made a few weeks ago for 2011 might not either. But one seems to have been a good bet. I wrote:  “Liam Fox will come under renewed pressure when it becomes clear that the defence budget cannot afford both aircraft carriers.” OK, so I phrased it provocatively. The Defence Secretary is an able and canny politician and will deal with any pressure that may arise. But my point stands; namely that the Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR) may not the last word, given some of the problems faced by the example the Army.

A handful of predictions

Here we go. Spurred on by Pete earlier, it’s time for that essential, although often regrettable, end-of-year ritual. Not the prosecco-fuelled partying, but rather something with far more embarrassment potential: predictions for next year. That’s right, amateur guesswork dressed up as serious-ish journalism. Some scribes are better at this than others. Ex-blogger Iain Dale hit the nail on the head by predicting the election of Ed Miliband as Labour leader. In a German aquarium, Paul the Octopus nailed all eight of his predictions for the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. By contrast, Mike Adams from NaturalNews probably ought to stop trying to channel Nostradamus. Last year, he predicted that

Minor indiscretions

The Telegraph’s latest Lib Dem revelations are embarrassing for the ministers concerned, but won’t cause the coalition much trouble. Ed Davey is caught being critical of the announcement to take child benefit away from higher-rate taxpayers and expressing concerns about the changes to housing benefit. Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary, is captured expressing regret about the Lib Dem u-turn on tuition fees and saying he couldn’t work with Tories like Liam Fox “for very long.” Steve Webb, the highly numerate pensions minister, was trapped into revealing that he had written to the Chancellor about the child benefit changes because “the details aren’t right.” There are, the Telegraph tells us, more

What is the MoD for?

Yesterday, Liam Fox vowed to install a tougher procurement system in the Ministry of Defence and appointed the bureaucracy-busting Bernard Grey as Chief of Defence Materiel. The Defence Secretary said that it is important to start from first principles if reform is to take place. The ministry, he said, “exists to provide the Armed Forces with what they need”. But is that right? The MoD exists, first, to maintain civilian and democratic control of the armed forces; and, second, to support effective operations. Supporting the military is a corollary of the second task, but not the same thing. In desiring to reform the MoD and cut costs, there is a

Fox’s Sri Lanka visit ‘postponed’

Gary Gibbon has just reported that Liam Fox’s visit to Sri Lanka has been ‘postponed’. His private visit this year has been replaced by the promise of an official visit next year. It was never really tenable that a Cabinet Minister could visit a foreign country to deliver a speech while claiming that the visit was private. William Hague has apparently now persuaded the Defence Secretary of this without damaging the relationship between the two men. When Fox does go to Sri Lanka, it’ll be fascinating to see what he says. Friends of Fox say that he really does believe that the Sri Lankan government’s actions have been justified. But

Gray heralds the latest shake-up

The coalition is taking it to the MoD, Whitehall’s most intransigent department.  The FT’s Alex Barker reports that Bernard Gray has been appointed Chief of Defence Materiel.  Gray is a revered and original defence specialist with a history of criticising the MoD in plain terms. Resentment persists over his savage report into procurement, which exposed the full extent of the wasteful ‘conspiracy of optimism’ that pervades the department’s operations and its relations with contractors. He argued: ‘Industry and the Armed Forces have a joint vested interest in sponsoring the largest programme at the lowest apparent cost in a ‘conspiracy of optimism’. This ‘conspiracy’ gives rise to an over-large programme, and

The clot at the heart of the MoD

Gibbon wrote that the Roman Empire collapsed under the weight of its own stupendous fabric. So too is the Ministry of Defence. An investigation by the Times (£) has revealed that bureaucratic intransigence has cost the taxpayer £6bn and several servicemen their lives. We have been here before with the Nimrod disaster and the subsequent Gray and Haddon-Cave reports. ‘A culture of optimism’ in procurement and maintenance leads to unsustainable costs, expensive delays, and, occasionally, the indefensible loss of life. At last, the Commons Public Accounts Committee is volubly shocked and has called for urgent reform.  The Times and the Committee blame the labyrinthine complexity of Whitehall’s last great monolith,

Progress towards an Afghan solution?

Nato has agreed to the Afghan plan, or so they say. As Lieutenant-Colonel David Eastman says, Afghan security forces are deemed to be sufficiently capable for the handover to begin next year, as Obama and Petraeus hope. There are those who disagree – some doubt the Afghans, some doubt success itself. Nato secretary general, Anders Fogh Rasmussen may have to be added to that former group of dissenters. He said earlier today: ‘If the Taliban or anyone else thinks they can wait us out, they can forget it.’ The problem for those of Rasmussen’s thinking is that the Taliban can wait; Nato can’t. William Hague has reiterated the government’s promise

Dave on the defensive

There is no sign of the heir to Blair at the Commons Liaison Committee this afternoon; in fact, David Cameron has been possessed by the ghost of Gordon. So far the Prime Minister’s answers have been cumbersome and statistic-heavy; and his delivery has had the dexterity of a three-legged elephant. He will have expected cannons to the left of him, but to the right as well? If he imagined that Tory backbenchers would coo appreciatively he will have been sadly disabused. Andrew Tyrie, James Arbuthnot and Bernard Jenkin have eviscerated him over the conduct of the strategic defence review. They deplored the culture of leaks and counter-briefing and probed Cameron

Saluting the fallen in Afghanistan

It is to be hoped that Prince William’s visit to Afghanistan for Remembrance Sunday was a morale boost to the troops out there, a reminder that the nation appreciates their courage and salutes their dedication to duty. It was a gesture—but a worthwhile and important one. The idea for Prince William to spend Remembrance Sunday in Afghanistan was Liam Fox’s. Fox was keen to have senior representation in theatre to show the troops that they were not a forgotten army and the whole visit was arranged several months ago. Fox and the Prince flew out to Afghanistan on a scheduled military cargo flight yesterday morning. They was nothing grand about