A sloppy “Review”, according to Chatham House
The revision of the security and defense policy carried out by the British Government has not yet been published (it is normally Wednesday) and already the criticisms are being heard across the Channel. And not least. The venerable 'Chatham House' has just thrown its venerable weight in the balance, under the pen of Paul Cornish, its director of the International Security Program, a former reserve (armor) officer and professor at the Carrington pulpit who is undoubtedly among the best connoisseurs of British security and defense issues.
The defense strategy review was “carried out at a very rapid pace. With such a fast schedule, there was little time for strategic thinking and ideas. The risk is to have a revision which is therefore the result neither of strategic ideas nor of financial decisions.. Clearly "A failure" that Paul Cornish does not hesitate to qualify as "Fox Review" (from the name of the Minister of Defence).
The "strategic puzzle": a Kingdom who no longer has the means for his ambitions
« There is very little chance that a radical change could, all at once, solve the current strategic puzzle of the United Kingdom he predicted. He is indeed " unlikely that a substantial reduction in the commitment to Afghanistan can be made, without risk, in the short term, just as it is unlikely that the national economic situation can recover so quickly that cuts in the defense budget and equipment will be reversed in one or two years. (What's more) " The coalition government seems reluctant to announce a fundamental foreign policy shift that would portray the UK as an irrelevant second-class power on issues such as international terrorism, nuclear proliferation, humanitarian aid, securing the maritime trade, etc. In short... we are at an impasse. And the Kingdom no longer has the means for its ambitions, concludes Paul Cornish. The UK still wants to be a “active participant in world affairs, with the strategic and operational commitments that flow from it, but without the economic weight, budget and appropriate resources »
...and forgets to distinguish challenges and see what he can do with others
Paul Cornish details at length what a real "Review" could have been. A " Effective national strategy requires a systematic approach to detect and analyze challenges and threats – the expected and the unexpected – as early as possible ". Economic upheaval, trade disputes, interstate rivalry and conflict, failed states, terrorism and the proliferation of unconventional weapons (not to mention) piracy, cyber warfare, border security and organized crime ... the challenges are not lacking according to the author. Only then can the correct answer be determined. " The answer to these challenges may lie in national resources, while in others the best answer may come, in terms of effectiveness and cost, from belonging to a coalition or a politico-military alliance such as the NATO. » (It may be noted that the author does not really cite the European Union).
