Email. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Email. This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Although we celebrated when European Communism collapsed at the beginning of the 1990s, it has proved not to be ‘The End of History’ as predicted by Francis Fukuyama, but more of a poisoned chalice, whose effects are becoming clearer day by day.
The Cold War has the advantage of simplicity as everyone, except the idealistic idiots of CND, and the traitorous fellow travellers who sought a Soviet triumph, were able to see that our most fundamental liberties were under threat from a totalitarian ideology, with ambitions to snuff out our democracy. We stood firm, and eventually the Soviets collapsed because of what Marxists would have referred to as their internal contradictions.
In the years that followed we came under came under attack from terrorists inspired by a mediaeval theology, and basically succeeded in driving them back. However the lack of a clearly identified enemy has led to the fragmentation of Western nations from within, as those who do not have a real foe have decided that they must find their opponents within their own society.
The Marxist organisations of Black Lives Matter, Stop the War and Extinction Rebellion have used reasonable causes to advocate extremist solutions, and have spread discord throughout society. The complete lunatics of ‘woke’ continue their campaign to denigrate our past, demonise all white people as ‘privileged’, and destroy free speech. Incidentally they might like to explain how my parents, who lived through the Great Depression, and saw a friend die of malnutrition in an English home, were ‘privileged’.
The absurd obsession of the American political class with these gender and cultural wars, to the exclusion of issues of real import, has led to probably the worst administration since the disastrous days of Herbert Hoover, with both the Presidency and Congress dominated by those who are consumed with the desire to argue about the inconsequential, while ignoring the truly significant. Not only has this already led to the betrayal of the people of Afghanistan, especially the women, but it has cast into doubt the future of the American place in the world, and to the future of NATO.
I am disgusted by the manner in which Western governments have scuttled out of Afghanistan, leaving the people to their fate. The inevitable result will be a resurgence of terrorist activity around the world, while the decent people of Afghanistan will once again be subjected to a mediaeval regime of bigots. It will embolden China, Iran and Russia, and make the world a more dangerous place for democracy. I dread to think of how of our troops those maimed in the conflict must now feel, while the loved ones of those killed must believe that they died in vain. In 1939 Leo Amery uttered his famous admonition “Speak for England” during the critical Commons debate on the German invasion of Poland and we in Tonbridge applaud our MP, Tom Tugendhat, for his similarly powerful speech on the debacle in Afghanistan.
I tremble for the future of those nations, such as Israel and Taiwan, for whom the retreat of the US to Fortress America will spell doom. For us the lesson must be that as America apparently reverts to inter war isolationism we must look to our defences. The most fundamental concept for any government should be patriotism, and the desire to put the interests of the people first, and its first duty, as is true of all governments, is the defence of the realm. We now face a world where Russia and China are hostile, Iran and associated Muslim states utterly opposed to our way of life, and, following the retreat from Afghanistan, America apparently reverting to inter war isolationism.
Obviously we are no longer the paramount military power in the world, as we were for over a century, but we are nevertheless, along with France, the only European nation which could, in the absence of American forces, resist an onslaught from the East. We must ensure that we are like a nest of hornets, sufficiently strong to make attacking us not worthwhile. This will entail immense cost, but, if American involvement in Western defences is to be curtailed, then it will be the only way to preserve our liberties.
To do this we need to double the size of the Army, and the RAF, while building a great many more Naval warships, including a large number of smaller frigates to guard our coasts, not least from the tide of illegal immigration crossing the Channel. In addition our military hardware should be built in the UK, necessitating reopening shipyards, and steelworks, while the insane policy of selling our most vital armament manufacturers to foreign owners must be stopped, and reversed. Importantly we must have a larger nuclear deterrent, which is fully independent of American control, while our capabilities in the realm of cyber space must be enhanced. All this would involve great expense, but that is the price of liberty.
Those who deride our martial abilities should remember that the UK’s DNA contains warlike Vikings, Saxons, Celts and Romans, that the British beat Philip II, Napoleon, the Kaiser and Hitler, and that when our freedoms are threatened we have always been a formidable opponent. I don’t believe that we have fundamentally changed, despite all the noise from those on the Left who hate their own country!
Veterans for Britain, supported by the Bruges Group, bring an urgent message to Manchester on Monday 2 October: we need full Brexit for defence and an end to recent UK commitments to the EU that have a nasty sting in the tail.
Since the Brexit vote, the UK has given a green light to the juggernaut of EU military schemes on the understanding we would be outside of them.
However, government position papers incredibly propose STAYING IN joint EU schemes on military finance, research and assets.
The schemes, which have never been voted on by MPs, would mean the UK staying in EU Common Defence Policy, the European Defence Agency and even EU defence procurement directives. Norway is the only non-EU country in the schemes and was obliged to accept these rules.
The PM has rightly declared the UK’s unconditional commitment to Europe’s defence via NATO.
However, we fear that MPs and ministers are not aware of the full implications of a Norway-style military union agreement. Many civil servants are aware of these implications and are pushing for UK entry relentlessly.
At the same time as these new EU military finance and structure schemes are being agreed, the EU is growing the remit of its Common Security and Defence Policy in a way that consolidates its control over EU Council-agreed military responses. The EU’s new military HQ, the MPCC, which UK diplomats tried in vain to change, is just a small part of this.
The EU is also tightening defence asset production rules to make an EU defence market in which member state governments will find it impossible to protect domestic defence jobs and industry eg Scottish shipyards in the UK’s case.
Sadly, the Government’s National Shipbuilding Strategy of September 2017 fully adheres to the latest EU rules in cross-border defence tendering – clearly anticipating a future where the UK would need to comply.
It is essential that at the Conservative Party Conference in Manchester delegates are made aware of the risk to Scottish shipyards, particularly Ruth Davidson and her Scottish Conservatives team. The UK is heading towards a scenario where it is dictated by these EU procurement rules which will only become more assertive when the UK is fully committed to them.
‘Dodging the EU bullet’
Speakers: Major-General Julian Thompson, Colonel Richard Kemp, Captain Will Carver & Geoffrey Van Orden MEP
Monday 2nd Oct 11.00 at Manchester Town Hall, Albert Square, Manchester, M60 2LA
For more info on the commitments made by the UK to the EU military juggernaut and the risks posed from the proposal to stay in them, see:
http://veteransforbritain.uk/dexeus-defence-partnership-paper-is-a-grave-mistake-and-gives-the-eu-control/
and
https://www.brugesgroup.com/blog/the-uk-is-stuck-in-a-quagmire-over-eu-defence-union
There are five main areas which the EU has been pursuing in order to establish what it calls an ‘EU Defence Union’ across the 28 EU countries, including the UK.
1. Procurement policy and incentives
2. Finance
Security is the new defining issue of both British and European politics. Even the United States is concerned that Europe’s problem is a danger for us all. It will also form the key issue in the Article 50 Brexit negotiations, or at least so the Government hopes. According to The Daily Telegraph, the Cabinet meeting of 7th March 2017, which approved the strategy for PM Theresa May’s opening gambit in her soon to be sent Article 50 letter mentioned security no less than 11 times.
Introduction
One unavoidable fact about the modern world is that criminal gangs and terrorist groups work across national borders.
A senior EU Commission official boasted in January that the EU "has done more in defence in the last seven months than in the previous decades".
It certainly looks like they have stepped up the pace since the Brexit vote.
According to Colonel Richard Kemp Britain would be forced to join an EU army within five to 10 years if people vote to Remain in the EU.
“An EU army is inevitable. As the EU has declared, it is moving to ever closer union, it intends to become a fully fledged superstate. That’s the plan.”
“We would essentially be giving up our right to sovereign self-defence. Control of the EU army would not rest with us but in a collective EU decision.”
“There would never be consensus for an EU military operation to retake the Falklands. It could not happen.”