There are those in the UK armed forces and the country's defence industry who are steeling themselves for a defence review later this year when, should notoriously fickle polls prove correct, the Labour Party again takes up the reigns of Government.

Several critical Royal Air Force projects may be caught up in this review, including the Future Medium Range Air-to-Air Missile choice for the Eurofighter EF2000 and the Airborne Stand-off Radar surveillance project.

The natural reaction of the armed services and industry is one of despair. Reviews of defence usually mean reviews of the defence budget, which lead to the horror of spending moratoria, and the concomitant impact of those on already fragile service and industry workforce morales.

Concerned parties might point to the Options for Change review undertaken by the Conservative Government in the early 1990s, and ask why another review is already necessary. The simple answer is that Options for Change turned out to be only an opportunity to fudge. Rather than attempt to untangle an intricate knot of resources and roles, Options for Change took the view that the UK's armed forces could continue to fulfil all operational roles, within a reduced force and financial framework.

The armed services, including the RAF, have dutifully struggled to meet the tasks set for them by their political masters, with fewer personnel, less equipment and not enough money. The result is that the fabric of the services has been left appearing threadbare more than once.

Handled properly, a genuine defence review need not necessarily be feared by the RAF, nor by the defence aerospace sector. This is not to say, however, that some of its specific conclusions might prove less than palatable.

What it could provide is the opportunity for a fresh examination of the roles demanded of the RAF and the other services, but this time properly measured against the resources the state is willing to make available. It would be far preferable to excel, as the RAF has prided itself on in the past, in a reduced number of roles rather than court the dangers of degrading all operational capabilities by spreading resources too thinly.

It would be up to the RAF, and air-power proponents, to justify its large-expenditure programmes within the framework of a review.

Whatever happens, military expenditure will inevitably come under further pressure. It would be far preferable, therefore, for any cuts to be made within a coherent strategic framework - something which has been sadly lacking in governmental thinking for a long time.

What a Labour Government ought to do is take a long-term approach to defence spending, and then to leave the budget well alone once any review has been put in place.

While big-ticket procurement items within the Government's Long Term Costings are the easiest targets for any parsimonious Chancellor of the Exchequer, force and command structures should also be considered. Even within the RAF, there is a recognition that it remains a top-heavy service, with an excess of brass.

With the establishment of the tri-service defence-helicopter flying-training school, it might prove worthwhile to re-examine rotary- wing capabilities within the three services, perhaps looking for any further rationalisation.

In terms of priority acquisitions, the RAF will attempt to protect absolutely the Eurofighter EF2000, and Labour has made nothing but encouraging noises in its support for this programme. Actual procurement numbers, however, remain undetermined. The junior service has recognised the attractions of reducing the number of front-line aircraft types which it operates - a defence review could expedite this. The Sepecat Jaguar Gr1B and Panavia Tornado F3 are to be replaced by the EF2000, but there has been no decision yet about replacing the British Aerospace/McDonnell Douglas Harrier GR7. A review might wish to consider whether the RAF wants to remain in the advanced short-take-off and vertical-landing business.

Any short-term delay to procurement may be an irritant to the services and industry, but, if the long-term benefits of a carefully considered defence review prove worthwhile, it should be looked upon as an opportunity.

Source: Flight International