Last Sunday, a story appeared on the UK Defence Journal . The site covers UK defence industry news and also offers commentary and analysis on military issues ranging from national security policy to procurement decisions. The story was by George Allison , a graduate in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University who has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters. Allison has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events relating to UK defence and NATO.
In his article, Allison argues that “a combination of outdated equipment, limited resources and diplomatic restrictions” continues to hold back the war-making potential of our armed forces. For decades , “the Argentine military has been in decline” and, before the F-16 deal, “the Air Force struggled to keep even a handful of its aircraft operational.” To hammer home the point, Allison reinforces his point by laying bare the weakness of Argentine air power, highlighting that our fleet of Mirage fighters has been retired from service and the A-4 Skyhawks, “once the backbone of its air power, have been grounded,” he said.
Allison gloats that “the Argentine military as a whole remains in a difficult position even with the new planes. The country’s ground forces are underfunded, poorly equipped and rarely have the resources to train properly. Much of their equipment is from the 1970s, and maintenance problems frequently plague grounded aircraft and disabled warships.”
It also highlights that Argentina’s defence budget is “heavily skewed towards personnel costs” , leaving little room for major new purchases of weapons and equipment. It also argues that “although there has been talk of buying $2 billion worth of modern equipment, these plans seem highly unrealistic given economic constraints” , exposing the dire situation of our armed forces, which “has often relied on foreign donations to fill the gaps” , demonstrating the weight of the United Kingdom, which in the face of “previous attempts to buy fighter jets from Sweden and China” “were blocked or failed due to costs” .
Allison argues that even with F-16s in our arsenal, “Argentina does not have the budget to maintain or modernize its military to the extent necessary for a credible regional challenge.” In addition to financial problems, our country “faces significant diplomatic constraints. Since the F-16s are American-made, any significant use of the aircraft would require U.S. approval, especially for maintenance and parts. This dependency makes it highly unlikely that Argentina could deploy them against British forces without facing major obstacles,” he argued.
The British specialist maintains that “Malvinas are located some 300 miles from the Argentine mainland, across the unpredictable waters of the South Atlantic. Any attempt to carry out a military operation at such a distance would be a logistical challenge, especially with the Argentine Navy and Air Force in their current state.”
Allison claims that the UK “maintains a robust defence system in the Malvinas” , arguing that “Typhoon aircraft, RAF Mount Pleasant ensure British air superiority, while a Royal Navy patrol vessel and ground troops provide additional security” . According to the specialist, the 1,500 or so uniformed personnel of the invading army permanently stationed on our islands provide “a formidable deterrent” .
For Allison, there is no doubt that the United Kingdom “can reinforce its position quickly if necessary, with attack submarines and other assets ready to deploy,” to which he adds “the challenges facing Argentina” as an additional factor.
In short, the British analyst said, “UK defences are more than adequate to ensure the security of the islands, making it clear that Argentina, despite its recent improvements, poses little threat at this time.”
Fountain:
