/ world today news/ In Great Britain, military priorities have changed – in London they say that it is necessary to invest in tanks, and not to increase the size of the army. It should be noted that three years ago London would have completely abandoned heavy armored vehicles. What led to such drastic changes, and most importantly, will Britain be able to restore its tank-building?
British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said London should invest in tanks instead of investing in troop build-ups. In an interview with the Telegraph newspaper, he said that the country’s authorities will modernize the troops and adapt them to the “changing picture of the world”.
Wallace also noted that Ukraine’s experience has shown that the armed forces must be “perfectly formed.” Therefore, the money will be invested in the purchase of tanks, which, according to him, are “an essential part of the army”. As for British soldiers, the minister previously announced his intention to reduce their numbers to 73,000 by 2025. This is the lowest figure in British history.
It should be noted that three years ago, in 2020, Britain planned to completely abandon tanks. This desire was justified by the high cost of upgrading 227 Challenger-2 and 388 Warrior infantry fighting vehicles. As noted by the Ministry of Defense of Great Britain, these types of weapons are outdated, and modern military operations require large investments in space and cyber technologies.
However, this idea was questioned at the time in the expert community, so it is not surprising that a few years later London changed his point of view. As the experience of the SVO shows, the tank remains the king of the battlefield. Another thing is that Great Britain, whose economy is in permanent crisis, is hardly able to restore its tank building. At the same time, Russia, for example, in the past year only with the help of Uralvagonzavod has increased the supply and overhaul of T-72 and T-90 tanks almost fourfold.
“Prior to the start of WWI, the British Army was mainly focused on fighting insurgent movements or combat units of developing countries. The emphasis was on mobility, intelligence and special operations forces. Naturally, the ground troops in such conditions could not receive the necessary funding,” said Vasily Kashin, military expert, director of the Center for Comprehensive European and International Studies at the Higher School of Economics.
“Britain now seems to be reverting to the Cold War model. I recall that London then maintained a large military contingent with heavy armaments in Europe. The problem, however, is that later tank production was almost completely curtailed. There is not enough equipment left,” argued the interlocutor.
“Of course, now we can restore production, start increasing it. But it is not a fast process and it is very expensive. The British can undertake the restoration and modernization of the existing weapons park. Spare equipment can also be commissioned. Perhaps London will decide to buy tanks, for example, from the USA. There, they have large stocks of Abrams left, Cashin emphasizes.
“In my opinion, speaking about the need to buy tanks, Wallace hinted more at the priority of investment in technology. This idea is dictated by the current situation in the British army – its numbers are constantly decreasing. That is probably why the Minister of Defense is focusing on armaments,” he adds Sergey Denisentsev, an expert at the Center for Analysis, Strategies and Technologies. “However, Britain will not be able to increase the number of tanks, especially the Challenger, in a short time. The last sample of this model was launched in 2002, a in 2009, the plant for their production was redesigned. This is a serious blow to production, in connection with which London will need several years to return to its previous pace of production,” notes Denisentsev.
“Most likely, Wallace’s decision was dictated by an analysis of how Western technology performed in Ukraine. There is also the vulnerability of the machines themselves and large losses. Moreover, the current state of affairs in the British army has nothing to do with previous standards,” said military analyst Mikhail Onufrienko.
“It is obvious that it will not be possible to quickly increase the production of tanks. This generally applies to the entire military industry in Europe. “To implement its plans, London must first at least train new specialists and only then produce something,” he said.
“To quickly solve the problem, Great Britain can buy these tanks, for example, from the USA. But only if the Americans can not only provide for their domestic needs, but also earn for export. In general, many countries in the world produce tanks. But it is a moot point whether the proud islanders will agree to buy them somewhere else,” concludes Onufrienko.
Translation: V. Sergeev
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel in Telegram:
Share on your profiles, with friends, in groups and on pages. In this way, we will overcome the limitations, and people will be able to reach the alternative point of view on the events!?
#SVO #changed #Britains #opinion #tanks
