ARMY chiefs are urging the UK Government to rethink its plan to have a Scottish brigade of 6500 personnel for fear of a public backlash should any future conflict claim the lives of too many Scots, The Herald has been told.
One of the key elements of last year's shake-up of Britain's military was a change in the Army structure to five multi-role brigades (MRBs) each comprising around 6500 personnel. These would include light infantry, armoured, mechanised and reconnaissance forces.
The original thinking was that each brigade would deploy for six months every three years to help provide continuity and to "sustain an enduring stabilisation operation".
One of the MRBs is due to be centred at Kirknewton, near Edinburgh, and made up largely of Scottish soldiers, including those from the Royal Regiment of Scotland.
This proposed change will result in a sizeable increase in troop numbers north of the Border by more than 2000.
Other MRB units will be housed at RAF Leuchars, which will become an Army base and headquarters, Glencorse barracks at Penicuik, Caledonia naval base at Rosyth, which will become another Army barracks, Albemarle barracks and eventually Arbroath as the Royal Marines move to the south-west of England. Army units will also be based at Kinloss from 2014/15.
At the time of the announcement of the shake-up, there appeared to be a political edge to it – given the context of the Scottish independence debate – with the Ministry of Defence saying: "This is in line with the Scottish tradition of supporting our armed forces and is a recognition these are United Kingdom forces under the Crown, protecting the citizens and interests of this United Kingdom."
The Herald was told by a senior Westminster source with a deep interest in defence matters that, since last year's review, concerns have been privately raised by military chiefs about the idea of a brigade being drawn largely from one geographical area.
"They have been looking at the make-up of the Scottish-based MRB and saying we need to be careful and not end up putting thousands of Scottish troops on one mission," he explained.
"Army chiefs are not convinced it's in anyone's interest to have a large group of men coming from one area involved in a particular conflict. It's not just a Scottish thing. The problem has always been with national brigades and the danger of one part of the UK ending up taking a really big whack if things go wrong," he added.
In the world wars, regiments were often made up from recruits from a specific area. One example involved the Accrington Pals, a division of 700 men mainly from the Lancashire town which was virtually wiped out on the first day of the Battle of the Somme in 1916.
The MRB structure is not due to come in for a few years so the concerns raised are about future deployments not current ones. However, if the military's fears are addressed, then the Scottish MRB could be made up not just of Scots but a mix of troops from across the UK.
Last night, a senior Labour backbencher told The Herald that each week Philip Hammond remained in his job showed how the Government's defence review was unravelling.
He said: This week it is the Army chiefs showing the defence review was driven by politics and not military considerations."
The MP added: "The Government needs to listen to the Army chiefs. The devil in all things is in the detail and maintaining troop morale is often difficult enough on any operation. If any nation or region of the UK saw huge casualties in a short period, it would become even more difficult to sell British involvement in any future conflict."
Mr Hammond is due to make a Commons statement before Easter on his review of last year's defence plans.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article