History > 2006 > UK > Wars >
Ministry of Defence
Armed Forces '5,000 short'
for campaign on two fronts
November 03, 2006
The Times
By Jill Sherman, Whitehall Editor
The Armed Forces are operating with at least
5,000 fewer men and women than are needed to meet Britain’s defence committments
around the world, the goverment spending watchdog says today.
The highly critical report from the National Audit Office reveals that the
Services have been operating beyond planned levels of defence for the past five
years to keep troops in Iraq and Afganistan. It also shows that disillusionment
among servicemen and women has increased to such an extent that 10,000 personnel
are quitting the Forces each year.
In addition, the Deepcut barracks bullying scandal, along with the death toll in
overseas campaigns, is putting off more and more potential recruits. A further
hindrance is Britain’s obesity problem: the report shows that only one third of
16-year-olds would pass the body mass index (BMI) test for new recruits.
Liam Fox, the Shadow Defence Secretary, said yesterday: “This damning report
confirms . . . that the gap between our commitments and resources is growing and
putting unacceptable pressures on our Service personnel and their families.”
The three Forces are now 5,170 under strength, a shortfall of 2.8 per cent. The
report, Recruitment and Retention in the Armed Forces, also says that they have
deployed troops at higher levels than in defence assessments in overseas
operations in each year since 2001. More than 8,000 troops are at present in
Iraq, with 5,248 in Afghanistan and more than 900 in Bosnia.
It is also revealed that there are 88 different specialities, or “pinch points”,
where staffing shortages are seen as critical. The report cites 70 per cent
shortages in medical staff and a 50 per cent shortage in weapons systems
operators.
As a result, service personnel are working longer hours and spending more time
away from their families. As many as 14,000 army personnel (14.5 per cent) had
breached Ministry of Defence guidelines by spending too much time away from home
in the past 30 months.
In some areas where the shortages were particularly acute, up to 40 per cent had
breached the guidelines. The report claims that many men and women are quitting
because overseas deployments leave them with too little time with their
families.
The audit office says that the number of those leaving the Services early has
increased slightly in the past two years, with 9,200 leaving last year before
their period of engagement was up.
A survey of those who had recently left showed that 49 per cent did so because
of the impact on family life, 28 per cent cited too many deployments and 32 per
cent blamed poor quality of equipment.
Recruitment has been hit by Iraq and by stories of bullying at Deepcut. “The
Army’s research found that 42 per cent of parents would be less likely to
encourage their children towards a career in the Army because of operations in
Iraq, while 27 per cent said they were put off because of events at Deepcut,”
the report said.
However, the audit office re-commends that the Ministry of Defence spend its
money on retaining staff rather than recruitment. It argues that it costs £74
million to retain 2,500 people for another year, compared with £189 million to
recruit and train the same number.
Last week Bill Jeffrey, Permanent Secretary at the MoD, admitted to the Commons
Defence Committee that having 13,000 troops in two long-term campaigns breached
the Government’s own policy on the maximum commitment of the Armed Forces to
overseas operations.
Derek Twigg, the Defence Minister, denied that the forces were overstretched.
“We do understand the impact that frequent operational tours have on serving
personnel, their friends and families, and we have recently announced
improvements in pay and benefits for those who are deployed on operations.”
Roll call
Army 100,0000
shortfall 1.8%
Royal Navy 33,470
shortfall 3.6%
Royal Air Force 45,210
shortfall 4.5%
Overall shortfall 2.8%
Source: National Audit Office
The Liberal Democrats have become the first
party to call for British troops to be withdrawn from Iraq after Sir Menzies
Campbell said that they should come back “in months, not years” (Sam Coates
writes). Previously they had taken a similar line to Labour and the
Conservatives and argued that no timetable should be set on withdrawal.
Armed
Forces '5,000 short' for campaign on two fronts, Ts, 3.11.2006,
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2435488,00.html
Sexual harassment rife in armed forces
· 1 in 4 women reports offensive male
behaviour
· Defence chief admits urgent action is needed
Friday May 26, 2006
Guardian
Jacqueline Maley
Sexual harassment is rife in the armed forces, with 99% of servicewomen
reporting they had been subjected to some form of sexual remark or material by
male colleagues in the past year. One in seven - 15% - say they have had a
"particularly upsetting" experience over the same period, ranging from sexually
explicit comments through to sexual assault.
The figures are part of a huge survey into
sexual harassment in the armed forces which began last June following several
high profile sexual harassment cases and a high number of complaints to the
Equal Opportunities Commission. The commission announced its intention to use
its statutory powers to investigate, but the Ministry of Defence held off the
inquiry by agreeing to commission the independent report, which was released
yesterday.
More than half of all servicewomen, or 9,384 personnel, responded to the survey,
and almost all had experienced sexual jokes and stories or been exposed to
sexual language and material in the workplace. The survey found a high tolerance
for such behaviour, but more than half of the respondents said they sometimes
found it offensive. Women were most insulted by explicit sexual language,
details of sexual exploits and pornography.
More than two-thirds of the women had direct experience of sexual harassment,
which ranged from unwelcome comments to unwanted touching and sexual assault.
Of the 15% of women who had had a "particularly upsetting" experience, an eighth
said it had been a sexual assault. The findings also consistently showed that
younger women and women of lower ranks were more vulnerable to sexual
harassment. Nearly half (49%) of the experiences lasted for two months and 23%
lasted six months. A quarter of those who had had a "particularly upsetting"
experience were considering leaving the forces and 11% had health problems.
Nearly half the women felt there was a problem with sexual harassment in the
services, and the longer they had been in the service, the more likely they were
to think so. By contrast, most servicemen involved in focus groups on the
subject did not think there was a problem.
The research is the first phase in an action plan against sexual harassment that
the armed forces have agreed to implement, and reflects an acknowledgment by
senior MoD officials that a cultural change is needed.
"We have a problem we must deal with urgently," said the chief of the defence
staff, Air Chief Marshal Sir Jock Stirrup. "This is not about political
correctness. It is about operational effectiveness."
Air Chief Marshal Stirrup said any behaviour which weakens the trust and
inter-dependence of armed forces personnel would erode their effectiveness in
the field, but denied that macho behaviour was essential to team bonding.
"We will not become fuzzy and un-military ... but what we will do is insist that
each and every member of the armed forces respects and values each other."
The secretary of state for defence, Des Browne, said the British armed forces
were "standard bearers for the values they defend" on deployment, and as such it
was vital for these values to be upheld within the service itself.
The research was commissioned after several high profile sexual harassment
cases, including that of Catherine Brumfitt, a military police officer. In June
2003 she attended a training course run by Sergeant JJ Fitzpatrick, who used
sexual scenarios to illustrate points in his lessons, and frequently used sexual
terms such as "tommed up the arse", "butt fuck" and "wanking over the bed
sheets".
Although the employment tribunal found there was no sexual harassment, it
accepted that Sgt Fitzpatrick's conduct was humiliating to Mrs Brumfitt as a
woman. She has since left the armed forces and Sgt Fitzpatrick has been
promoted.
In another case, Corporal Leah Mates, 30, of the 14 Intelligence Company in
Northern Ireland, sought £686,000 in damages and loss of earnings after she
reported being subjected to a long list of sexual bullying incidents. When
deployed in Kosovo, she said a male soldier masturbated while shouting her name
in a tent shared by her and seven other soldiers. There had been comments about
the size of her breasts, and a picture of her face was placed on a shooting
target. In her statement, Cpl Mates said the harassment had led to her feeling
suicidal.
At the hearing in Southampton last year the tent incident was dismissed as
"light Army banter".
In a statement to the tribunal hearing, she said: "I now began to understand
that the army is a male preserve and a woman who tries to establish herself does
so at the peril of her health and happiness."
She was told she had proved 12 of more than 40 allegations, with compensation
being awarded for six. The other six did not meet a deadline set by the
employment tribunal. She was awarded £12,000.
Sexual harassment rife in armed forces, G, 26.5.2006,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,1783534,00.html
Britain took part in mock Iran invasion
Pentagon planned for Tehran conflict with war
game involving UK troops
Saturday April 15, 2006
Guardian
Julian Borger in Washington and Ewen MacAskill
British officers took part in a US war game
aimed at preparing for a possible invasion of Iran, despite repeated claims by
the foreign secretary, Jack Straw, that a military strike against Iran is
inconceivable.
The war game, codenamed Hotspur 2004, took
place at the US base of Fort Belvoir in Virginia in July 2004.
A Ministry of Defence spokesman played down its significance yesterday. "These
paper-based exercises are designed to test officers to the limit in fictitious
scenarios. We use invented countries and situations using real maps," he said.
The disclosure of Britain's participation came in the week in which the Iranian
crisis intensified, with a US report that the White House was contemplating a
tactical nuclear strike and Tehran defying the United Nations security council.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, the Iranian president, who sparked outrage in the US,
Europe and Israel last year by calling for Israel to be wiped off the face of
the Earth, created more alarm yesterday. He told a conference in Tehran in
support of the Palestinians: "Like it or not, the Zionist regime is heading
toward annihilation. The Zionist regime is a rotten, dried tree that will be
eliminated by one storm."
The senior British officers took part in the Iranian war game just over a year
after the invasion of Iraq. It was focused on the Caspian Sea, with an invasion
date of 2015. Although the planners said the game was based on a fictitious
Middle East country called Korona, the border corresponded exactly with Iran's
and the characteristics of the enemy were Iranian.
A British medium-weight brigade operated as part of a US-led force.
The MoD's Defence Science and Technology Laboratory, which helped run the war
game, described it on its website as the "year's main analytical event of the
UK-US Future Land Operations Interoperability Study" aimed at ensuring that both
armies work well together. The study "was extremely well received on both sides
of the Atlantic".
According to an MoD source, war games covering a variety of scenarios are
conducted regularly by senior British officers in the UK, the US or at Nato
headquarters. He cited senior military staff carrying out a mock invasion of
southern England last week and one of Scotland in January.
However, Hotspur took place at a time of accelerated US planning after the fall
of Baghdad for a possible conflict with Iran. That planning is being carried out
by US Central Command, responsible for the Middle East and central Asia area of
operations, and by Strategic Command, which carries out long-range bombing and
nuclear operations.
William Arkin, a former army intelligence officer who first reported on the
contingency planning for a possible nuclear strike against Iran in his military
column for the Washington Post online, said: "The United States military is
really, really getting ready, building war plans and options, studying maps,
shifting its thinking."
A Foreign Office spokesman said: "The foreign secretary has made his position
very clear that military action is inconceivable. The Foreign Office regards
speculation about war, particularly involving Britain, as unhelpful at a time
when the diplomatic route is still being pursued."
After the failure of a mission to Tehran on Thursday by Mohammed ElBaradei, the
head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Russia announced a diplomatic
initiative yesterday. It is to host a new round of talks in Moscow on Tuesday
with the US, the EU and China.
Britain took part in mock Iran invasion, G, 15.4.2006,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/iran/story/0,,1754307,00.html
|