General Odierno has publicly voiced his concern over future working with the UK, an issue that Westminster-Whitehall would prefer not be asked, as it undermines the 'Special Relationship'.
Link:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31688929I would be lying to you if I did not say that I am very concerned about the GDP investment in the UK. In the past we would have a British army division working alongside an American division. Now it might be a British brigade inside an American division, or even a British battalion inside an American brigade. We have to adjust our programme to make sure we are all able to see that we can still work together.....(He described Britain's role as a key US ally as) about having a partner that has very close values and the same goals as we do. As we look at threats around the world, these are global issues and we need to have multinational solutions. They are concerning to everyone. We all need to be able to invest and work together to solve these problems.
The BBC cites the original story elsewhere:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...-general.html?
There are several issues here, notably UK military capability as it shrinks and how much is spent on defence (2% GDP being an agreed NATO level).
Avid SWC readers will know UK military reform and the politics are debated in the main thread 'UK military problems & policies', with 85k views and 200 posts:http://council.smallwarsjournal.com/...ead.php?t=4819
For at least two years now I have encountered mutterings about the UK's declining capability and perceived lack of political (and public) will to remain the US's willing partner. It is the irony of following the US into the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, as an ally, that the US military first began to ask were we a capable and willing partner. Diplomacy aside I do wonder if American politicians have asked such questions.
I expect if UK (and NATO) defence spending dips below 2% of GDP that the criticism of Europe relying on the USA for it's defence to become louder.
Bookmarks