CDS lecture to RUSI

#1
Already being discussed on CA, but worth reposting here. CDS lecture to RUSI last week on what the future holds.

General Sir David Richards speech to the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI) | Think Defence


But our most decisive asset will remain our Service men and women. As the private sector puts it, we must look after the ‘talent’. As I see equipment around the world parked with no-one to operate it. Great equipment without talented people counts for little. We must ensure our people have the intelligence and confidence to treat the unexpected as an opportunity to exploit. They must be capable of informed, independent action; of what has been described as a ‘brains-based approach’ to operations.
Will be interesting to see how we "look after the talent" during the swingeing cuts and transition to a very different way of conducting business. Hopefully it will be rather better thought-out than hurriedly offering an FRI to the latest pinch-point trade...

Lots of other interesting points in the speech, but just thought I'd pick out one to start the ball rolling.
 
B

Biscuits_AB

Guest
#3
I've spoke to many people in the private sector and from what I can gather, profit is 'king', full stop. Having recently spoken to a former senior manager from M & S, he said that M & S treated their clothing range better than their staff. It's all about profits in the private sector and savings in the Government departments, so as long as those two factors are being met, any human involvement amounts to mere collateral, talented or not.
 
#4
Interesting read, especially about the need for joint diplomatic/aid/military thinking and action. I seem to remember Frank Kitson saying the same thing about 40 years ago. Hopefully there'll be the political will for this to succeed, and not just use it as an excuse to rationalise further: I think there'll be a temptation to rely on the projection of "soft power" as a meaningful intervention, which, as my old gran used to say, would be all fur coat and no knickers. Not much direct mention on his thoughts around G2, although plenty implied. Lots of scope to keep IAs employed, and \i would be interested to see how the joining of INT/SIGS at directorate level impacts on the cyber warfare bit. Thanks for the signpost...
 
#5
I'm also interested by the Cyber point. This, with mention of reserve involvement and a significant expansion of our volunteers on the cards may be a good indication of what they might actually "do". Also it would be good if the soft approach opened up more embassy defence sections - i am sure those jobs would be popular!
 
#6
I'm also interested by the Cyber point. This, with mention of reserve involvement and a significant expansion of our volunteers on the cards may be a good indication of what they might actually "do". Also it would be good if the soft approach opened up more embassy defence sections - i am sure those jobs would be popular!
Don't tell Dingerr.
 
#8
I read the text of the speech after the initial CA thread was posted. One thing of interest was CDS advocating a larger surface combatant force for the RN. The implication that I drew is that this is could be the opening shot to get HMG to fund more T26 frigates than the current plan to replace the T23's one for one.

I found the cyber warfare thing interesting as well. Could we be at the start of the process were the Corps moves into this area?

By the way, who else read this article in yesterdays Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ht-trust-and-it-might-yet-bring-conflict.html

Maybe a bit of a scare story, but it does have a logical argument. The return to power of the LDP in Japan and endorsement of them possibly becoming officially non-pacifist by the Phillippines in light of China's new assertiveness could make for an interesting short to medium term in the far east. That's without the lunatic asylum/gulag that is North Korea being added to the equation (interestingly the article doesn't mention NK).
 
#9
One thing of interest was CDS advocating a larger surface combatant force for the RN. The implication that I drew is that this is could be the opening shot to get HMG to fund more T26 frigates than the current plan to replace the T23's one for one.
Asking for more, knowing he'll be beaten down to settle for replacing the T23s one for one? Rather than the T45 replacement saga (12 then 8 then 6).
 
#10
Asking for more, knowing he'll be beaten down to settle for replacing the T23s one for one? Rather than the T45 replacement saga (12 then 8 then 6).
I would not at all be surprised if you are correct.....
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top