Putin is ready to declare victory – Europe must be prepared

While President Zelensky has tabled his plan for victory, it will not succeed without greater support from his allies

The Trinity House Agreement signed today between John Healey and Boris Pistorius is a welcome reignition of the strong military relationship between the UK and Germany that has been allowed to wither since the end of the Cold War. 
The previous geographic proximity of 55,000 British soldiers to the Bundeswehr and four RAF main operating bases in Germany during those days resulted in great cooperation between the two countries. This new bilateral agreement mirrors the Lancaster House agreement with France and complements the earlier Aachen agreement between France and Germany. 
However, as important as these bilateral agreements are, they should not diminish in any way our steadfast commitment to the security of Europe through our membership of Nato – the bedrock of that security. Of course, the level of enthusiasm with which the US will commit to Nato in the future may well be determined by the poll on Tuesday 5 November. That said whether there is a Trump or a Harris victory, there is no doubt that European states must take a far greater responsibility for their own security. The deadly war in Ukraine makes that crystal clear.
At the recent Baltic Military Conference in Vilnius there were very many worried, Estonians, Latvians and Lithuanians. Why else would Sweden and Finland have chosen this moment to join Nato, and why else would Poland be on course to create the largest army in Europe? The threat of further aggression from Putin’s Russia cannot be underestimated and wished away in a reprise of the 1930’s appeasement. Bilateral agreements such as the one signed today are an important component of increased cooperation and interoperability between Nato members. 
The periodic use of RAF Lossiemouth by German P8 surveillance aircraft makes great sense in that context as does the agreement with Rheinmetall to build artillery gun barrels in the UK in the industrial and economic context. Moreover, the agreement to collaborate on drone technology is an obvious response to the battlefield dynamics of the Ukraine war while the intention to develop rapidly new long-range strike weapons is a key ingredient of future deterrent capability.
Future intentions and signed agreements are one thing but dealing with the immediate issue of helping Ukraine achieve a position of dominance on the battlefield is another. Now in the third year of this devastating war the Ukrainians are in a precarious position.  Albeit at great human cost, Russian forces are making gains in eastern Ukraine in part enabled by their Chinese, Iranian and North Korean allies. While President Zelensky has tabled his plan for victory, it will not succeed without greater support from his allies. 
The continuing restrictions placed on the use of long-range weapons such as Storm Shadow constrain Ukraine’s ability to conduct the deep component of the deep, close and rear battles necessary to turn the tide. The uncomfortable question lurks – have Ukraine’s allies done enough to prevent her being defeated on the battlefield but not done enough to give her the chance to prevail?  Defeating Russian forces in Ukraine now looks like an unachievable objective but assisting Ukraine to a position of dominance – vital if there are to be future negotiations – is still within reach.
However, the elephant in the corner as far as the UK is concerned is money. Bilateral agreements with allies are useful but they are no substitute for fully funding our own armed forces. Doubtless, the Strategic Defence Review currently underway will produce fine policy statements but like the SDR of 1997-98 it will ultimately fail if the Chancellor of the Exchequer does not fully fund the outcome.  
Rachel Reeves will obviously signal her intentions in the upcoming budget. A commitment to spend 2.5 per cent of GDP on defence by a definite date would be a welcome start but she must brace herself for calls for that figure to rise to 3 per cent or 3.5 per cent if the UK is to fully play its part in collective European security.
General Lord Dannatt was Chief of the General Staff from 2006 to 2009