British troops 'could withdraw from Germany' under Tories
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
British troops could be withdrawn from Germany for good, nearly 70 years after the end of the Second World War, if the Conservatives win the general election, it was revealed today.
Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox said it was "no longer necessary" to maintain the presence of more than 20,000 military personnel.
Ending the commitment would free up forces to carry out vital Nato operations outside of Europe, he insisted.
Generations of squaddies and their families have passed through Germany, although the size has been scaled down over the years. The presence is now centred on Herford near Hanover, where the 1st Armoured Division is based.
In an interview with the Daily Telegraph, Dr Fox signalled his determination to conduct a "wholesale recasting of our foreign and defence policy".
He wants new Nato member states from eastern and central Europe, particularly Poland, to take over Britain's commitments in Germany and free British troops to be deployed elsewhere.
A final decision will depend on negotiations with Nato allies, in particular France, and on the Ministry of Defence's ability to handle the return of so many soldiers for whom there is no accommodation in the UK.
Dr Fox insisted: "If other countries are willing to take up roles in continental defence that leaves Britain and France able to take on expeditionary roles.
"Finding a more creative diplomatic solution in Nato will be a priority for an incoming Conservative government.
"Much as people regard it as a great political sport to be constantly berating our allies on what they do and don't do in Afghanistan, it's more important that we have more effective burden sharing so we can be freed up from some responsibilities.
"What is not possible is for Britain to try to do everything. It's clear that things as they are cannot continue. We need some change."
He added: "We need to be clear that there are constitutional and political reasons why some Nato countries will not be able to do the same amount when it comes to expeditionary warfare.
"We can either hammer on about burden sharing, or we can start looking at what countries will be able to do within their political, constitutional and military constraints. Far better in Nato that countries have roles which they are 100% willing to carry out."
Dr Fox said he had told civil servants to prepare plans for cutting the department's administrative costs by 25% - some £3bn - by 2012.
The Tories are also looking at fast-tracking younger commanders with combat experience in Iraq and Afghanistan to senior posts.
He confirmed that General Sir Richard Dannatt, the former head of the Army who fell out with Gordon Brown over the Afghanistan campaign, would not be a minister in a Conservative administration - although he has been offered a peerage.
Dr Fox also delivered a stark warning about the "dangerous" media clamour for a unilateral withdrawal from Afghanistan.
"If in a UN sanctioned mission, carried out by Nato, Britain were unilaterally to pull out, where does that leave Britain as a strategic partner in the future?" he said.
"Where does that leave us? If you want to be in the third division, that's the way to go about it."
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Particularly as Germany completely ignore our tiny island....
Air jordan(1-24)shoes $33
UGG BOOT $50
Nike shox(R4,NZ,OZ,TL1,TL2,TL3) $35
Handbags(Coach lv fendi d&g) $35
Tshirts (Polo ,ed hardy,lacoste) $16
Jean(True Religion,ed hardy,coogi) $30
Sunglasses(Oakey,coach,gucci,Armaini) $16
New era cap $15
Bikini (Ed hardy,polo) $25
FREE sHIPPING
http://www.9elife.com
I have and your wrong
Pull-out now and stay out until they can get to implement de decent democratic system.
If there are issues about pay, allowances and decent down-time then there are separate from posting troops overseas and need to be addressed as separate issues.
It is many years since I have been to Germany but I believe the country has got to the state where responsibility could be handed over to German police and forces. Once that has been achieved then we can pull-out. Where is the problem ?
The problem is exactly in your sentence. The UK and the US don't want to "hand over responsibility" to the Germans but want the Germans (who have the draft) to deliver German troops for their wars (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan) and German battleships to control the coast of Lebanon and for their battle against pirates at the African shores.
Is Strategic Partner a euphemism for Unquestioning Poodle?
as it turned out the Soviets were a bit of a paper tiger in comparison to NATO Forces.....smoke and mirrors again.
iot's not like they are the other side of the world if they need our help+the garrison towns in germany who benefit from the custom of british troops could and should be british garrison towns many of which could do with the economic benefits a return hopme would giveIt is highly questionable whether or not they should still be there after all this time it's time germany did the bulkof protecting itselfa pity the tories don't have any sensible ideas on anything else
Afghanistan is not a NATO war.
NATO is being used by Americans as its private army, and was never designed to be fighting in Afghanistan, it is for the defense of European countries not offense in america's Afghanistan war.
U.N. sanctioned mission? Dr. Fox do you think the world is blind deaf or just stupid, we have seen exactly what the Americans think of the United Nations, and the way in which they manipulate the U.N. 1 minute American/Britain are going to take unilateral action against Iraq and Afghanistan without U.N. support.
Then the next minute you say you can't withdraw because you got a U.N. sanction mission. Like that makes all the difference in the world to the thousands of people that are being murdered.
But whatever, this piece of news isn´t news anyway because the Con-servatives aint in power yet. I predict that on 24th of March next year I shall eat a currant bun. Is that news ?
..... take it your annoyed that you havent been allowed to annex a couple of countries for the last 70 years?
This is simply because we will not be able to fund present numbers.
Nor will we finish the two aricraft carriers, or be able to upgrade equipment for our troops and airforce so as to continue to interface with the Americans in the present way.
The most we will be able to do is provide canon-fodder.
It is not now a case of 'making a choice if we want to maintain the armed forces or become a third-rate power'.
The die is already cast, and financial deficits are so huge that massive reductions in capability are inevitable.
That is not the half of it, as we will also be unable to maintain present pension arrangements, and in particular unable to continue paying ex-Government employees many times that which private pensioners get.
In this latest sitcom sketch he has no idea who is fighting at who's behest in Afghanistan, he has arbitrarily decided to play politics with the armed forces - a constant moan of his against Labour, and he has not based his vagaries on military advice - something he and his cohorts have long bugled was a Labour sin.
And, of course, as on commentator has pointed out, this is nothing more than a tabloid headline about what might happen in the future if the Tories win and if he is Defence Minister.
What a shabby trick offering Dannat a K. That's two that Cameron has used for bribes in the last fortnight. Clearly, honours are still a Conservative currency.
As for the knighthood; at least Dannat served his country. However, much better if we gave it to ex Labour patsies like our honourable ex speaker, the corupt Mandleson.... or negotiate a nobody as the new assistant EU stoodge...... genius..... Im sure your proud!
The money spent by the UK in supporting British forces stationed in UK would be better spent on improving the accomodation of said personnel and families back home here in the UK. Or perhaps there is no suitible accomodation here in UK for these people
The armed forces personnel in Germany receive extra pay, in the form of Local Overseas Allowance, dependants need supporting with social service payments and support etc and medical facilities. The children of service personnel have to be educated either in British funded schools for said children in Germany; and school staff paid. Some military personnel elect to board their children in UK schools, for which they receive payment from MOD funds; not forgetting flights to and from UK during holidays.
Let us also not forget how much money British military personnel and their dependents are pumping into the German economy. Charity begins at home. Bring home ALL British military personnel and their dependants from Germany as soon as possible please.
Thank you
In fact why are the Americans still there as well?
Are we not a powerful bloc of nations all with modern militaries and two nuclear powers?
Why is Europe not allowed to develop fully its own bloc wide military apparatus? In fact why is Europe not allowed to develop itself to its full potential in any format?
Isn't it about time we were allowed to rule our own affairs, without outside interference from America to our cost and their benefit, its time Europe grew up, we were civilising this planet whilst the occupants of America had little more sophistication than cavemen.
As for Germany, it is a stable modern and technological and economic powerhouse, it does not need foreign troops sitting there anymore, Russia isn't going to invade anytime soon especially as the Russians are highly dependent on the EU and will be for some time, it is unlikely to bite the hand that feeds it...