Youngest in 400 years
The British army population is declining to an unprecedented level
The British Army reached the peak of its strength in 1916. Archives
Before World War I, Great Britain had the only true "professional" army in Europe. There was a volunteer force of about 400,000 soldiers, and among them there were about 247,000 who served in the regular army, while 145,000 others served in the regional force. The British Army did not reach the peak of its power until after the introduction of compulsory conscription, which began in January 1916, and by the end of 1918 there were more than four million soldiers and 70 divisions in service.
Today, the British Army is the smallest in 400 years and is on the cusp of getting smaller, and according to the upcoming defense review, which is due to be published in April, about 10,000 soldiers from the regular army, numbering about 82,000, may be dispensed with as a means of assistance. In financing modernization efforts, this reduction could come even as the Department of Defense prepares to receive an additional 16.5 billion pounds over the next four years.
The plan is to use technology, including autonomous weapons platforms, to allow the army to become "more flexible", and the plan also includes reducing the strength of the British army's armored vehicles, and in this the head of the Army Strategic Planning, Brigadier General John Clark, says that by harnessing technology The British Army will be able to "achieve the same effect with fewer people", and it is not clear whether the technology can replace "soldiers on the ground".
Jack Watling, of the Royal United Services Institute in London, indicated that an army of 72,000 was still able to seize and control specific areas, although the British army faced great difficulties to secure the city of Basra, when its strength exceeded 100,000.
Researcher Sophia Wright, in a recent study of modernization efforts, indicated that there are some notable concerns about whether there has been enough investment to truly transform the British Army into a "less numerous, high-tech fighting force," writes Wright, "while the overall budget has increased from 38." One billion pounds (53 billion dollars) to 48 billion pounds, the number is misleading, because it does not take into account the high costs of development or inflation. ”Follow-up:“ The most significant indicator is the percentage of the gross domestic product devoted to defense, which decreased from 3.5% To 1.7% between 1990 and 2020, yet the pace of troop deployments has not slowed, with the United Kingdom playing an active role in almost all NATO operations in the past decades.
The downsizing of the British army could also affect a seven-year-old boy, Prince George, the eldest son of Prince William, who is third in line to the throne, and this comes with certain responsibilities that usually include spending time in the army, and he is expected to follow in his father's footsteps. His grandmother, Prince Charles, and great-grandmother, Queen Elizabeth II, both served in the British Army.
The boy was spotted wearing a camouflage shirt on his seventh birthday, although his prospects for serving in the army diminish, even if the potential future monarch would be the commander of the United Kingdom Army, and Edward VII was the last British monarch who did not serve in the army, even though he hoped to pursue a career In the army, had it not been for the objection of his mother, Queen Victoria, to this decision.
• It is not clear whether technology can replace "soldiers on the ground."
Peter Socio - Michigan-based writer whose articles and writings have appeared in more than 40 magazines, newspapers, and websites.
Follow our latest local and sports news, and the latest political and economic developments via Google news