Defence Magazine

UK Defence Secretary
Geoff Hoon

The British Army is to be re-balanced to make it better able to meet the challenges and threats of the 21st century. The changes will complement its existing heavy and light-weight capabilities with new medium- weight forces and ensure that the Army is equipped, trained and organised to meet the demands of multiple, concurrent - and, above all, expeditionary - operations across the full spectrum of military tasks. Reductions in heavy armour, heavy artillery and the infantry will be accompanied by an increase in the number of key specialists without whom the Army cannot deploy on operations. Our objective is therefore to develop a more deployable, agile and flexible force.

Since July last year, the Army has been engaged - under the leadership of the UK Chief of the General Staff, General Sir Mike Jackson - in detailed work on how the changes should be implemented.

The future Army structure is underpinned by two complementary changes. First, is the move towards a more balanced force organised around two armoured brigades, three mechanised brigades, a light and an air assault brigade (in addition, of course, to the Royal Marines Commando Brigade).

We are moving ahead quickly with the changes required to put this in place. 19 Mechanised Brigade, based in Catterick, will start its conversion to a light brigade in January. The brigade will be ready for deployment on operations if required in the first half of 2006, when it will serve as the contingent NATO response force.

4th Armoured Brigade, based in Germany, will convert to a mechanised brigade in 2006, and the other brigades will adopt their new structures in a similar time frame. The key foundations on which the future Army structure is to be built will be in place by 2008.

But it is important to emphasise that frontline soldiers cannot be used if they cannot be deployed and sustained on operations because we lack sufficient supporting forces. In parallel, therefore, the Government is moving ahead with the second element of the re-organisation: making the Army more robust and resilient, able to sustain the enduring expeditionary operations that have become commonplace in recent years.

The overriding requirement is to make significant enhancements to the key specialist capabilities - communications, engineers, logisticians, intelligence experts and other key capabilities. And at the same time, the British Government wants to make fighting units - including the infantry - more robust by ensuring they have adequate numbers.

This is an ambitious program of change which will take several years to complete. Virtually every Army unit establishment has been examined, and 10,000 posts redistributed. Enhancements include the creation of a new commando engineer regiment, a new port and maritime unit, an additional strategic communications unit and a new logistic support regiment for each deployable brigade.

These are new capabilities - not cuts. They are being backed up by an impressive re-equipment program, introducing new communications equipment such as Bowman and Falcon, enhanced intelligence collection assets such as the Watchkeeper unmanned aerial vehicle and Soothsayer electronic warfare capability, modern vehicles such as the Panther armoured reconnaissance vehicle, and looking further ahead, the ambitious FRES armoured fighting vehicle programme which will modernise the armoured vehicle fleet and be the basis of the medium weight capability.

These enhancements will directly improve the ability of the Army to deploy, support and sustain itself on the range of operations that we envisage. That can only be achieved as a result of the planned reduction by four in the number of infantry battalions, which will release about 2400 posts for re-deployment across the force structure.

Changes to the infantry will be an emotive subject, understandable given the importance to morale, esprit de corps and operational effectiveness of regimental traditions.

But these changes to the infantry need to be considered in the wider context of re-balancing the Army, and the opportunity it affords to reallocate manpower to those areas that current and future operations will require.

A soldier from C Company, The Second Battalion, The Princess of Wales's Royal Regiment based south of Basrah, looks out of an armoured vehicle on January 30, election day in Iraq. Photo by Corporal Rob Knight, RLC, British Army

Because of the reduction in the requirement for permanently committed forces to support the Northern Ireland Police Service which flows from the encouraging progress towards a lasting settlement in North Ireland, the infantry arms plot - the mechanism by which units routinely move location and change role every few years - no longer represents the best way to deliver operational capability. In future, battalions will be fixed by role and largely by location.

This requires new means of providing variety of experience and posting for individuals to sustain the operational flexibility for which our infantry units are rightly famed. In future, this will be provided through individual posting. The only means of doing that within the framework of the regimental structure is by having regiments of more than one battalion.

Multi-battalion regiments will allow individuals to move between battalions while at the same time maintaining the sense of regimental identity that is so critical to the Army's ethos and fighting effectiveness.

Of the 40 battalions in the current British order of battle, as many as 11 are likely during any 12-month period to move location or re-role. At any one time, as many as seven may be unavailable for operations. This is simply not efficient.

The logic is undeniable: at the end of this process, many more, if not all, of the future 36 infantry battalions will actually be available for operations.

Phasing out the arms plot will mean that the infantry would be able to offer much greater stability for soldiers and their families. And it will also allow career development for both soldiers and officers to be much more carefully planned, while keeping the variety, opportunity and challenge of new roles and locations open to all soldiers within large regiments. And it will give greater Brigade cohesion by maintaining units within formations.

The Army concluded that the only prudent basis on which to make decisions is one that has regard to the long-term sustainability and effectiveness of the battalions concerned, based on an analysis of historic manning statistics, regional demographics and future manning predictions.

But it has also, rightly, tempered this with a recognition of the need to take account of regional and geographic representation. That is why, for example, Scotland will only have one reduction; and why The Royal Irish Regiment has been exempted from consideration.

The Army also considered the Gurkha battalions but concluded that - given the requirement to sustain the Brunei garrison and their excellent manning record - they should not face any reduction.

It also took account of the ceremonial duties required of the five battalions of the Foot Guards. It concluded that these justified the status quo in relation to both the number and organisation of these battalions.

Against this background, as recommended by the Army, that the first three battalions should be reduced by taking:

And in considering how the fourth reduction should be made I have taken into account the need for additional specialist enabling support which will underpin our future expeditionary capability.

Critical to our prosecution of the war against terror are the UK Special Forces. We are looking at the broader arrangements through which the Armed Forces provide support to special forces operations. It has been decided to develop a tri-Service "Ranger" unit alongside the other enhancements to specialist support elements of the Army.

The fourth infantry battalion reduction will be found by removing the 1st Battalion The Parachute Regiment from the infantry structure, and using its highly trained manpower as the core of a new, tri-Service ranger unit.

The move to larger, multi-battalion regiments is the only sustainable way in which to structure the British Army for the long-term. In implementing the new system, the Army will ensure that the regimental traditions, heritage, cultures and local connections will live on in the new arrangements. The new battalions will continue to recruit in the areas of their original constituent elements. Regional recruiting will remain the bedrock of the British infantry.

Nor will there be any diminution in the role of the Territorial Army (TA) and the Reserves. The TA will in future be more closely integrated with the Regular Army for both training and operations. Each of the 14 TA infantry battalions will be part of a regular parent regiment, one per regular regiment with the exception of the Royal Regiment of Scotland which will have two, and the Guards Division which will have one affiliated TA battalion.

The TA is also to be re-balanced to support large-scale operations and home defence, as well as remaining capable of reinforcing regular units deploying on enduring operations. It will remain broadly the same size as today but with a structure that is more capable and relevant to future operations.

The Army will continue at its current size. At about 102,000 strong, it will continue to require more than 11,000 new recruits every year, and offer a wide range of high quality employment and training opportunities.

The new army structure will deliver a British Army fit for the challenges of the 21st century. It will preserve the vital traditions and ethos. And it will improve the lives of soldiers and their families.

This is an edited version of the speech by UK Secretary of State for Defence Geoff Hoon, made to the House of Commons on December 16, 2004.

Defence

Big Picture

Future force

British Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon explains why the British Army is being restructured to meet the demands of multiple expeditionary operations.