'Glaring gaps' and small Royal Navy fleet leaves Britain exposed to Russia attack in High North
.jpg?width=96&crop=1:1,smart)
The High North has been earmarked as a strategically important location, where Russia has been bolstering its forces
Shrinking resources and not enough Royal Navy ships in the High North leaves the UK vulnerable to attacks and infiltration from Russia, MPs have warned.
The Commons Defence Committee warned that there are “glaring gaps” in the country’s military capabilities. They said “dramatic progress” is needed in building up UK armed forces and ships in the strategically important region by 2030 - the year from which former prime minister Sir Keir Starmer predicted Moscow could attack Nato.
The High North has become crucial for the UK’s defence and security, with Vladimir Putin’s Russia increasingly sending spy ships based there into British waters, at the same time as doubts have been cast on Washington’s commitment to European security. Failing to defend the region could leave underwater cables and pipelines carrying key data and energy to the UK exposed to sabotage during peacetime, the committee said.
In the event of conflict, it said Russia could threaten the UK’s population, civilian and military infrastructure and vital Atlantic supply routes from the US. The Royal Navy flagship HMS Prince of Wales has started the second phase of Operation Firecrest with the UK Carrier Strike Group (UKCSG), but questions have been asked around a long term presence in the region.
Much of this surrounds the new Type 26 and 31 frigates being built in Glasgow. The Strategic Defence Review (SDR) outlined that City-class submarine-hunting warships will primarily patrol the North Atlantic and High North as part of a hybrid force of drones and un-crewed vessels.
Problems surround the timeline, with the majority of new ships not being ready until the 2030s. The earliest ship will be in the fleet by 2028 at the earliest. Advanced replacements for the Type 45 destroyers, known as Common Combat Vessels (CCVs), have not been given a specific deadline at all, although it’s hoped they’ll be built in the 2030s.
In a report, the MPs highlighted a shortfall in anti-submarine warfare at a time when the greatest Russian threat comes from its submarines and naval sabotage forces. The best deterrent is the Royal Navy’s anti-submarine warships and nuclear-powered submarines, but these are ageing and often out of action under maintenance.
There are currently just five Type 23 frigates, which track down hostile submarines and protect the UK’s nuclear weapons, and six Type 45 destroyers in service – just over half of the Royal Navy’s requirement for 19 vessels. With construction of new ships being slow, the Defence Committee urged ministers to ensure that none of the remaining ones leaves service in the meantime.
The committee’s inquiry also heard of “a shockingly low availability” of Astute-class submarines, and that the UK appeared to have temporarily lost its ability to operate them beneath Arctic ice. This would allow Russia in a conflict to conceal its nuclear submarines under the ice unchallenged while its attack submarines surge forward.
Committee chairman Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi said: “The High North poses a major strategic challenge for the UK’s security. This is a demanding, hostile environment, and one that our greatest adversary, Russia, is seeking to dominate for military advantage. The UK needs to be willing to address a hard truth: it does not currently have all the capabilities to operate successfully in the High North.
“Russian submarine and sabotage forces in the High North pose direct risks to the North Atlantic and the UK, including the nuclear deterrent. Despite this, the Ministry of Defence has accepted a serious anti-submarine warfare gap. Publicly available evidence of low availability among destroyers, frigates and attack submarines calls into question whether the UK can meet its commitments in the High North. And if the UK Government means what it says – that Russia could attack Nato as soon as 2030 – then work to rectify these vulnerabilities cannot start soon enough.”
The committee also questioned whether the Joint Expeditionary Force (Jef), a UK-led military coalition of northern European nations, should focus more on threats in the High North rather than maintaining the same level of activity in the Baltic region.
Mr Dhesi urged ministers to consider this “particularly if the UK has to plan for uncertainty over US support for Nato”. He said the UK may need to consider bolstering the current British Army force in the Baltic - particularly Estonia - to offset greater Jef focus on the High North.
First Sea Lord General Sir Gwyn Jenkins previously warned that Russia will become even more of a threat if the Royal Navy is not rebuilt, stating that if you “lose the war at sea and you lose the war”.
Conservative shadow minister for war readiness Stuart Anderson said: “This Defence Committee report exposes glaring capability gaps in the High North at a time when the threat of war with Russia is rising. If Nato could be at war with Russia as soon as 2030, as the former prime minister warned, that means time is just as important as money.
“To deter war we must be ready for it, that means spending money now, not kicking the can down the road until it’s too late. The Chancellor must come to the Budget with his plan for spending three per cent of GDP on defence by 2030 – anything less leaves Britain at risk in the High North.”
The Kremlin is seeking to exploit the High North, loosely defined as the Arctic and parts of the North Atlantic, for minerals and for control over shipping routes as melting sea ice makes them more accessible.