European defense

a couple of reports about the steady usurpation of power by the EU, the first from the EU Referendum blog is on a procurement of trucks for the Army. These went to a consortium that was not objectively the better one, it's opposition being cheaper and battle proven, but this consortium being politically better situated. Nothing new their, however the consortium is primarily situated in Euroland rather than the UK and the USA (the main competitor).

Why would a government not try to maximise the number of new jobs that it can get for it's electors, especially just before and election? A good question, and the answer has two parts. Part one, New Labour goes into this election in such a commanding position that it knows that it will win a third term, ignoring this small electoral bribe will make a negligible difference.

Part two requires a bit of forward thinking, but that is something that Eurosceptics find very easy, and looking at the longer term issues related to logistics, not admittedly the most sexy subject and therefore a classic Euroland attack avenue. In upcoming conflicts there are only going to be small numbers of very deadly units deployed. The effectiveness of such as small but powerful force was ably demonstrated by the defeat of the Iraqi army in Gulf War 2, which combined with the cost savings makes it highly attractive. To make such a force work it has all got to mesh seamlessly, in a very large army a few unit delayed to action will not make a difference with these small forces it could make a very big difference. In order to get the seamless logistical support required Armies around the world are looking to IT to help them, just as it has helped the private courier companies, and getting back to the point in question these trucks come with logistics software which being Euroland software will let the British Army mesh with the armies of Euroland seamlessly. Also being Euroland software it will not mesh with that of the armies of the USA. But why would Tony plan on not joining with the USA in future? After all he just defied basically the entire country to take us to war with them in Iraq. Simple one of Tony's pet European projects, since he had to beg Bill Clinton to threaten sending in ground troops to Kosovo, has been a credible European defense force. In a choice between continuing are existing alliance with the USA or being able to build the force that was his baby he has obviously chosen the one that will make him look the most like the forward looking statesman. This being despite the fact of Gulf War 2 showing that the creation of this force will lead to the Armies of the United Kingdom not being used in a way that the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom thinks is best, and given the paralysis of every other area of the EU (baring Aquis Communitare) may never be used at all despite real threats (which Iraq wasn't) or real emergencies (look at the EU and UN response to the Asian Tsunami whilst the Royal Navy and US navy where actually doing stuff).