Massive cut backs in Dutch Defense!

[Ruy Horta]

The current dutch conservative government is about to present the most radical defense cut back since the late twenties early thirties, proofing that politicians don't learn from history.

With the end of the cold war it is obvious that a force reduction was in place, but there comes a point where continued cut backs will degrade your ability to conduct combined arms operations.

Just one example. Our government is planning to remove all tanks (Leopard II) from its inventory. Just imagine an army with no armored force...it borders on the incredulous. With memories of our little armored cars in 1940 opposing the Wehrmacht one should think that no self respecting army general could accept having no tanks (no matter how many Apaches - and we have only a few - or anti tank capable AFV you've got - a MBT is a force of its own).

I don't have a blog, but I just have to vent my frustration in some way or another and this off topic sub forum will have to do.

The irony of it is that in the Netherlands it is the conservative right that seems to do the biggest defense cut backs, but it is the left that gets the blame when the shit hits the fan for being "pacifist".

Well I hope the generals remember who stabbed them in the backs.

An army without tanks....might as well pack the whole thing in and start a people's militia.

Madness...

[Maximowitz]

I feel your pain. Over here in the UK we are replacing our armed forces with a large, freshly laundered white flag.

[Marcel van Heijkop]

Hi Ruy,

My feelings exactly, I feel my anger rising as well...But remember the Dutch proverb: The people get the government they deserve......... Maybe we should change the national motto of "Je maintiendrai" in "Penny wise, pound foolish"? Seems more apt.. (Not only for Defense, also for Education, Healthcare, etc.). But don't forget to be grateful that you're now allowed to drive 130 km/h on the motorway, very important..

Which makes me wonder again why I voted for the right, I seem to remember thinking that our national Defense would be in safer hands with them..

1930's all over!

Regards,

Marcel

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Maximowitz

I feel your pain. Over here in the UK we are replacing our armed forces with a large, freshly laundered white flag.

Can I recommend Lewis Page's book "Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs" which provides an excellent account of how the UK spends so much on "defence" and gets so little capability in return for it.

P.S. you forgot the "independent" deterrent (wholly dependent on America) that makes us so much more secure than Spain, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Italy, Holland, Belgium etc.

[Ruy Horta]

Originally Posted by Nick Beale

P.S. you forgot the "independent" deterrent (wholly dependent on America) that makes us so much more secure than Spain, Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Italy, Holland, Belgium etc.

The RN is still a global force, with both modern and/or excellent SSN and SSBN.
Indeed the nuclear deterrent is but one factor which sets the UK (and France) apart from the rest of the Western-European defence forces.

Britain and France are still capable of power projection.

But the dutch ability to field any first rate combined military force will end with these plans.

We'll be able to field light (at best special) forces, nice for riot control and or counter insurgency / peace keeping ops, but without real hitting power.

I guess we've forgotten Srebrenica as well...

[John Beaman]

Well, a most interesting thread.

The new USA Republican budget for the next decade says we should lower our defense posture. That's wrong. I believe that we should have more than 8 carriers in operation. We are the only ones who can project power anywhere when needed. Is that a "bad" thing? I think not. When you need power, you need power. Frankly, I do not see the world getting any safer in the next decades. And, while we may not have a "big" war, the current Middle East chaos says we should keep our swords sharp and our eyes bright. The next war will not be about idealogy, per se, but resources.

Forgive me, Ruy, but I do not see the RN as a viable power projection force in the future except for nuclear Armageddon. What's left to project? France can be, with carriers still operational and in most respects, the willingness to use them. The Ivory Coast is a good example of France willing to project power for whatever reason.

The Chinese are still some years away from a true "blue water" navy that could seriously challenge the USN, but, beleive me, they are determined to get Taiwan. When they think they are ready, they will take it and dare the US to do anything.

[Ruy Horta]

A carrier TF is an ideal platform for exerting diplomatic pressure, and it also offers a great way of putting considerable air power near a trouble spot if it is anywhere near the coast. It is the modern day's tool for old fashion gun boat diplomacy.

But I'm not so sure if it is the best tool for true sea control, which imho is just another type of power projection, albeit less visible than a carrier and less capable in extending its effect in- and over land.

It was the RN SSNs that effectively controlled the sea during the Falkland war, not the surface fleet.

All hypothetical for the Dutch Royal Navy as we've sold our only carrier in the sixties and have only small fleet of diesel subs that are mainly restricted to operations in the North Sea.

All IMHO as an uninformed arm chair general (or admiral )

...an army without Tanks, it just isn't right.

[Nick Beale]

Originally Posted by Ruy Horta

The RN is still a global force … Britain and France are still capable of power projection.

Although I honestly cannot recall a single instance in my lifetime when this has proved of the slightest benefit to the British people. And the gratitude/ingratitude ratio among those in whose direction we have projected said power is far from unequivocal as well.

[Ruy Horta]

aha, that's another discussion!

[Pilot]

Strange... like the no wars will be in future?