The British House of Lords has published a report claiming that military recruitment is dangerously low and the country's combat readiness is at risk. They say the civilian population 'must be ready to fight' (a clear reference to military conscription) should war with Russia be triggered.
The paper, titled 'Ukraine: A Wake-Up Call', admits to weaknesses in NATO's assumptions on "deterrence", though it seems to pretend as if Ukraine is part of NATO when it's not. Chaired by Lord de Mauley, the committee launched the inquiry in February 2024, two years after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, with the goal of assessing the conflict’s implications for UK defence policy.
"...We identified two key lessons. First, our deterrence strategy towards Russia clearly failed. If we are to restore the credibility of NATO’s nuclear and conventional deterrence posture towards Putin, we must develop a clearer understanding of the reasons for this failure."
"Secondly, the invasion exposed significant weaknesses in both the UK’s and NATO’s military strength, and the UK's ability to sustain large-scale warfare. Successive governments have attempted to maintain the notion of the UK as a global power, but the war in Ukraine has been a wake-up call, laying bare the gap between that ambition and reality."
The report paints a concerning picture of the British Army’s ability to contribute adequately to NATO’s deterrence strategy. It states:
“All in all, the evidence we heard points to the current size of the British Army being inadequate. While size is not the only measure of capability, we are concerned that the Army cannot, as currently constituted, make the expected troop contribution to NATO. We therefore question whether the British Army is prepared to meet the growing threat posed by Russia to European security.”
The current size of the British Army is 75,166 regular troops and 183,000 personnel across all branches. Keep in mind only 80,000 of these personnel would play a front line combat role. If the casualty numbers coming out of Ukraine are anywhere close to accurate this would not be enough troops to sustain a single year of combat in an attrition based war.
The House of Lords called on Prime Minister Keir Starmer to develop a plan that “resonates with citizens, emphasizing the importance of national security in their daily lives and moving beyond the notion that defense is solely the military’s responsibility”.
The paper also warned that while there was a risk that conversations around civilians “could end up veering into discussions around conscription”, the government had “an opportunity to broaden this out and consider how it could incorporate the whole of society in building resilience”.
The real question is, why would the British public fight for the current government? Military recruitment relies heavily on true patriots and a sense of national identity, but Keir Starmer and government overall has made it quite clear that they intend to erase indigenous Anglo-Saxon British identity through forced mass immigration from third-world countries. Starmer has even gone so far as to arrest British citizens simply for posting critical opinions on social media.
The House of Lords acts bewildered as to why the civilian population has little interest in military readiness. Maybe it's because the British government has gone full Orwellian? The average westerner is not going to go to war to risk their lives for a system that oppresses them. This is why recruitment is at all time lows and why conscription would be useless.
Another factor which likely plays a considerable part in public apprehension is the threat of WWIII. The majority of people in the west have little enthusiasm over engaging in a war that could very well lead to a global nuclear exchange, especially over a country like Ukraine which, for them, is insignificant. There is nothing to be gained.