I enjoy talking about defence priorities as much as the next man but a couple of nights ago I thought maybe we should stop arguing about slivers of a percentage point get back to some first principles and think out aloud whether the UK would actually benefit from less defence spending than more or even the same.I think we can easily say that TD is at the acceptance stage of the Kubler-Ross model of grieving.
Now this might seem completely insane in light of the current belligerence from Russian and Islamic civil war across large parts of the Middle East and Africa but what threats do they actually pose, I mean really. What would be lost because of a perceived lack of prestige and influence derived from our world famous fifth largest defence budget in the world?
If we look back at what advantages accrued from our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq it is hard to put a great deal of value in the benefits column, the costs are pretty clear and service personnel and their families will be paying the price for decades to come. It might be easy to be wise after the event but looking back is supposed to support the learning of lessons. Keeping ones noses out of other peoples business might seem like some to be moral cowardice but others might see the same as prudent, wise and considered behaviour.
But what does this mean for US policy?
Easy.
I'm tired of us paying the bill so that others can slash their defenses. If Think Defense wants to blame the US for its internal woes with regard to its defense spending then awesome.
The US response should be to close every base in that soggy country, exclude them from our nuclear trident program, bar them from using our cruise missiles and let them bow out of the F-35 program (I especially like the last one).
I mean seriously...the French don't even whine as much as the Brits do these days.
Let's just ease their pain and our own and be happy for the past partnerships and head in different directions.
