{"id":26239,"date":"2021-05-24T09:00:00","date_gmt":"2021-05-24T09:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/uncategorized\/2021\/05\/24\/uk-army-chief-talks-green-energy-countering-russia-and-digital-modernization\/"},"modified":"2026-08-07T22:09:06","modified_gmt":"2026-08-07T22:09:06","slug":"uk-army-chief-talks-green-energy-countering-russia-and-digital-modernization","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/one.sightlinemg.com\/defensenews\/interviews\/2021\/05\/24\/uk-army-chief-talks-green-energy-countering-russia-and-digital-modernization\/","title":{"rendered":"UK Army chief talks green energy, countering Russia and digital modernization"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

WASHINGTON \u2014 When the United Kingdom released<\/a> the \u201cThe Integrated Review of Security, Defence, Development and Foreign Policy<\/a>,\u201d a document designed to serve as the guidepost for the future of its military, it included calls for modernizing the British Army and retiring older systems. Gen. Mark Carleton-Smith, the Army\u2019s chief of the general staff, is the person in charge of executing that vision.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

During a May visit to Washington, he sat down with Defense News to explain some of the changes facing the service as the U.K. moves toward a heavily digital future focused on the Pacific region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This interview has been edited for length and clarity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The U.S. Army is having an existential discussion about its role as a land force at a time when the country is focused on the Indo-Pacific region \u2014 an area certainly not lacking bodies of water. Britain\u2019s integrated review posits a need to focus on that region. What is the British Army\u2019s discussion about its future there?<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Well, you\u2019re right: The strategic relevance and utility of the land component, particularly the conventional land component, in a moment in military history when it looks as though the real challenge is warfare of the information age, rather than continuing to double down on conventional dominance in a form of warfare that might already be behind us, is one of the existential challenges which the review has sought to address.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

With respect to the specifics of the land contribution across the Indo-Asia-Pacific: Our emphasis as the Army will be more on the Indo than it will be necessarily to the Asia-Pacific. We\u2019ve had long military relations across that region, most particularly with Australia and New Zealand. And those are ones that we will continue to reinforce. They play host to combined exercises to which we contribute. We are interested in continuing to reinforce our relationship with both Japan and South Korea. Japan I visited just before COVID-19 lockdown, and I\u2019m planning to visit Seoul later in the summer. And so those all indicate a much more active Army conversation across the region.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

When it comes to defending against Russia, the U.S. is considering increasing its inventory of pre-positioned gear. What\u2019s the British Army\u2019s plan for defending Europe, if such action is necessary?<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cForward presence\u201d would be my bumper label for it. The key utility that we need to bring is readiness and speed of response, and that is much more complicated with a domesticated Army garrisoned in the United Kingdom. We are going to be doubling down on our residual Army locations in Germany and making sure that we\u2019re going to forward-base some of our key war-fighting equipment and stocks in order to increase our responsiveness and shorten the timeline. And we will simply flow troops forward to marry up with our equipment in Germany. From there, they will be able to exploit all the overland strategic routes to reinforce our Baltic partners, our [Enhanced Forward Presence] in Poland, and indeed I wouldn\u2019t even rule out in the future a greater British Army interest in the southern flank of the Balkans.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We have the facilities and are investing in more facilities for precisely that in Germany. We\u2019ll be looking at a sort of spoke-and-hub arrangement, but the real investment is going into a sort of central depot.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The British Royal Air Force said it <\/b>wants to be carbon neutral<\/b><\/a> by 2040. The U.S. Army is investing in electric vehicles. Do you have a big green idea?<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think the Army, given our size and scale, needs to be a core leader with respect to the green agenda in the U.K. After our own National Health Service, we\u2019re the single-largest organization in the country. We are responsible for just over 1 percent of the U.K.\u2019s real estate. So we\u2019ve got not just a responsibility, we\u2019ve got a real opportunity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

We are opening our first set of solar farms later this summer. We would want, inside the balance of this decade, to be carbon neutral and generating all our own energy in order to sustain our garrisons. And we have plans for upward of 100 solar farms across our accommodation garrison and training estates in the future.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

This isn\u2019t just, in a sense, burnishing our green credentials; it actually comes with very significant materiel [and] operational advantages as well. It makes the force lighter, more self-sustained and with less detrimental footprint, all of which is a good thing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Is this just for basing and not related to going carbon neutral for the whole force?<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n

In a sense, [it\u2019s part of creating] all our own energy for the running of our own facilities. I think we\u2019re, industrially, still some way away from completely living without carbon engines in our principal war-fighting equipment. There\u2019s considerable battery and propulsion requirements that have not yet been solved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

I think the next generation feels a responsibility toward it. They\u2019re intellectually interested in it. Some of them find it one of the important features of an organization that they\u2019re inclined to volunteer and serve with, so it\u2019s a major incentive \u2014 or disincentive, if we get this wrong.<\/p>\n\n\n\t