EU Defence cut´s

  • 3 Respostas
  • 2373 Visualizações
*

typhonman

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 5146
  • Recebeu: 743 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 1632 vez(es)
  • +8536/-4167
EU Defence cut´s
« em: Setembro 21, 2012, 11:18:35 pm »
Citar
EU to be pretty much defenceless in a few yearsSeptember 21 2012 at 11:04 PM
No score for this post   
Coalde  (Login coalde_one)
WAFFer.
EUs Army in Decline, Senior Officer Admits

Friday, 21 September 2012

Many European Union countries will not be able to afford key parts of their armed forces, such as air forces, in a few years unless they spend more and cooperate more closely on defense, the top EU military officer said Sept. 19.

In a hard-hitting speech, Hakan Syren, a Swedish general who chairs the EUs Military Committee, said rising costs, inefficiencies and budget cuts had brought European defense to a critical point. The military capabilities of the EU states are on a steady downward slope, Syren told a seminar in Brussels organized by Greek Cyprus, which currently holds the EU presidency. The downturn is mirrored slightly by trends in the United States, but comes in stark contrast to Russia and China.prime example, said Syren.

The downturn in spending is mirrored slightly by trends in the United States, but comes in stark contrast to Russia, which increased defense spending by 9.3 percent in 2011, and China, which has increased such expenditures by a whopping 170 percent since 2002 and now has the second-best funded military in the world.

Looking a few years into the future, it is simple mathematics to predict that many member states will be unable to sustain essential parts of their national forces, air forces being the prime example, Syren said.

Embarrassingly obvious

The EU army chief said he was speaking out now because he was nearing the end of his three-year term as chairman of the Military Committee. Many EU states have slashed defense spending as part of deficit-cutting measures forced on them by the financial crisis, which has plunged the eurozone into turmoil. It was embarrassingly obvious that long-identified European deficiencies such as intelligence, precision-guided munitions and air-to-air refueling had not yet been fixed, Reuters quoted Syren as saying. He cited the high cost of military operations as another pressure on European armed forces.

According to a study released by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) in April, the countries with the biggest falls have included many that have faced severe sovereign debt crises, and where austerity measures have been particularly harsh: Greece (down 26 percent since 2008), Spain (18 percent), Italy (16 percent) and Ireland (11 percent); but also Belgium (12 percent).

In contrast, the top three spenders in Western Europe, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, have so far made only modest cuts in military spending, in each case less than 5 percent. Germany and the U.K. both plan further cuts in military spending in the coming years as the U.K. plans to make a 7.5 percent cut in real terms by 2014-15, while Germany plans cuts of around 4 percent in cash terms by 2015. U.S. spending decreased slightly in 2011 for first time since 1998, and spending is likely to fall over the next few years due to withdrawals from Iraq and Afghanistan and new budget control measures.

While China has devoted far more money to its military in real terms, the total remains in line with its aggressive economic growth, typically equaling 2 percent of gross domestic product each year.

Friday, 21 September 2012

Hurriyet Daily News

Que novidade...
 

*

P44

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 18190
  • Recebeu: 5490 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 5859 vez(es)
  • +7123/-9508
Re: EU Defence cut´s
« Responder #1 em: Janeiro 23, 2013, 03:47:02 pm »
Trident: No Need For Like-For-Like Replacement, Says Danny Alexander (excerpt)
   
   
(Source: The Guardian; published January 22, 2013)
 
 
   
   The UK does not need to replace the Trident fleet with "like-for-like" nuclear submarines that will cost the country billions of pounds at a time of national austerity, the chief secretary to the Treasury, Danny Alexander, insists.

In an interview with the Guardian, Alexander said MPs from all parties and senior officers in the military should accept there are "credible and compelling alternatives" to continuous at-sea deterrence, and he warned that the Treasury did not have "a magic pot of money" to pay for a new generation of Successor submarines.

The world had changed, he said, and so had the defence assumptions that underpinned the position since the cold war.

Alexander, who is now in charge of the Cabinet Office-led Trident Alternatives Review, said: "Given all the financial pressures across the whole of the public sector, all the things the government has to do and wants to pay for, and all the pressures in different areas, I just think the idea that somehow, out of thin air, we can carve a multibillion pocket to pay for this, that is not financially realistic."

He described as a "non-starter" the idea that the Treasury could find new cash to help the Ministry of Defence pay for new submarines, which is the privately held assumption of some Conservative MPs and officials at the MoD.

"We are in a position where the costs of the Successor have to be paid for from within the MoD budget. There is no magic pot of money that is going to be created out of thin air to go on top of that. As a government, we have been very clear about that. Certainly myself and the chancellor.

"That very financial imperative is one of the reasons why I think this review is so important. We have already set out that it is going to take another three years to deal with the deficit. That means budgets across the board naturally have to be squeezed, including defence."

The Liberal Democrats demanded a review into alternatives to replacing Trident as part of the coalition agreement, and it was initially led by the then armed forces minister, Nick Harvey.

When Harvey was moved from the MoD last September, Alexander took charge of the detailed study, which is due to be completed and published by June this year.

In his first interview since taking charge of the review, Alexander said nothing he had seen or heard in the last four months had challenged his view that replacing the Trident fleet was unnecessary – and unnecessarily expensive. (end of excerpt)


(EDITOR’S NOTE: Given the UK coalition government’s reckless dismantling of its armed forces on the back of the inane Strategic Defence and Security Review of 2010 – the retirement of the aircraft carriers and of the Harrier force; scrapping of the Nimrod MR4 and resultant loss of maritime patrol capability; reduction of the frigate flotilla; huge cuts in military manning levels, to name but a few – this interview certainly reinforces the impression that the lunatics have taken over the asylum.

Its most worrying aspect is that it shows that Alexander considers defense as just one of “all the things the government has to do and wants to pay for,” instead of being the principal and overriding duty of any government.

And, when Alexander says that “…it is going to take another three years to deal with the deficit [and] that means budgets across the board naturally have to be squeezed, including defence," he is admitting that the UK military is being gutted simply to meet self-imposed goals for debt reduction. Britain thus risks becoming the first European country to have been effectively disarmed by rating agencies.

Finally this interview demonstrates the danger of giving “bean counters” a say over issues of which they have no understanding. To the uninformed, it can be tempting to believe that three missile submarines are just as effective as four, and that since having two at sea at any one time is very costly, one could do just as well. Reality is different.

Giving bean counters the power to decide policy has already brought us the subprime crisis, the banking crisis, and the current recession across Europe, which even the IMF now belatedly admits was a costly mistake. But giving them the keys to defense policy and to the military is as irresponsible as government gets.)



Click here for the full story, on the Guardian website.

-ends-

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... ament.html
"[Os portugueses são]um povo tão dócil e tão bem amestrado que até merecia estar no Jardim Zoológico"
-Dom Januário Torgal Ferreira, Bispo das Forças Armadas
 

*

P44

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 18190
  • Recebeu: 5490 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 5859 vez(es)
  • +7123/-9508
Re: EU Defence cut´s
« Responder #2 em: Janeiro 23, 2013, 03:59:09 pm »
22 January 2013 Last updated at 18:34 GMT

Thousands face Army job losses in summer

The Army is planning to reduce its regular fighting force to 82,000 by 2017


Thousands of military personnel face a five-month wait to find out whether they will lose their jobs as part of a restructure of the armed forces.

The Ministry of Defence has outlined a third round of 5,300 Army redundancies to be set out in June, as it tries to reduce the number of regulars from 102,000 to 82,000 by 2017.

The MoD said the cuts are necessary "to meet the challenges of the future".

But campaigners said they created a "worrying" situation for Army families.

Redundancy notices to those affected by this latest round will be issued on 18 June.

No personnel preparing for, serving on, or recovering from deployments on that date will lose their jobs unless they have applied for redundancy, the MoD said, but they could be affected next year.

This round of redundancies will be the largest set of cuts faced by the Army so far as the MoD bids to plug a £38bn hole in the defence budget

continua:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21134353
"[Os portugueses são]um povo tão dócil e tão bem amestrado que até merecia estar no Jardim Zoológico"
-Dom Januário Torgal Ferreira, Bispo das Forças Armadas
 

*

typhonman

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 5146
  • Recebeu: 743 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 1632 vez(es)
  • +8536/-4167
Re: EU Defence cut´s
« Responder #3 em: Janeiro 23, 2013, 10:28:35 pm »
carrega....