The decision means cuts in the RAF, including Harrier and Tornado fighters being scrapped.

Britain‘s ability to defend itself from attack has been called into question after deep cutbacks to the Armed Forces were announced to pay for the war in Afghanistan. Critics including former RAF chiefs say the cuts in fast jets will make Britain more vulnerable to attack from modern states with airpower.

But some analysts say that not only can Britain no longer afford to be a premier-league military power, there is also less need for fighter jets in a modern military context – future conflicts are likely to be low-level clashes between smaller groups and not traditional state-to-state warfare.

And the MoD says that in an era of tight budgets, it is only right to prioritise the needs of troops on the frontline.

Who is right? Does Britain need dozens of fighter jets?

If Afghanistan is the main focus of our defence policy, shouldn’t it be funded from the main defence budget?

Enhanced by Zemanta

Related posts:

  1. MoD slashes civilian budget to divert resources to Afghanistan frontline
  2. Defence: the cost of Afghanistan
  3. Election 2010: heading for battle on defence spending
  4. Defence Cuts: Something is going to give
  5. British troops died thwarting Taliban suicide bombers at packed market

Tagged with: • • • • • • •

Filed under: Afghanistan War

Like this post? Subscribe to my RSS feed and get loads more!