Think Defence asked the question...Civil resilience is (mostly) not a defence task and the MoD should be (mostly) nowhere near it

Civil resilience is (mostly) not a defence task and the MoD should be (mostly) nowhere near it pic.twitter.com/4IdDhceq9R

— Think Defence (@thinkdefence) March 27, 2020

I haven't heard this anywhere else but I thought it worthy of discussion on the blog.

Don't get me wrong.  I like TD.  I think he's a good guy (the container thing is a bit..."strange"...but to each his own).

On this one I don't understand his reasoning.

Everywhere this virus has struck we've seen a civil-military response.  For catastrophes of this magnitude I don't believe ANY civilian authority is powerful enough to deal with it.

Even in the UK (TD's nation) we've seen military units activated to deal with the response.  Same in Italy, Spain, China and here in the US (don't have much visibility on other nations but I will admit that from what I've seen of India it appears that its mostly a paramilitary-police activity).

On a personal level I'm in favor of a more back to basics approach.  We did the rebranding and went from Civil Defense to FEMA.

With that transition I believe we lost some of the flavor of the older organization.  Perhaps that's because the threat of nuclear war (which was Civil Defense's focus) faded but with some of the dramas of the past two decades it would appear that community preparedness is more important than ever.

Anyway, what do you think.  Do you agree with TD?