Even at the time the SDSR was seen more as a strategic spending review, more than a defence review; it maintained the myth of no change to strategic posture while eviscerating strategic capability (both hard and soft).
I think Mr Mason is asking the wrong questions, focusing as he does mostly on types of threats (the means) and not from where they emanate (the who) and to what purpose (the ends). The first question should be what are the UK's national interests (in priority order), then what are the most likely threats against them, then what means do we need to defend/maintain these national interests. For instance is it in the UK's national interest to maintain a seat on the UNSC P5? If so, how much of a priority is this and can we afford it? UNSC P5 status can only be maintained through credible hard and soft power.
Bookmarks