LONDON \u2014 Britain will need to find an extra \u00a36 billion (US $9 billion) a year by the end of the decade to keep its defense budget in line with the NATO mandated spending level of 2 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), a former defense minister said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Nick Harvey, the Liberal Democrat defense spokesman in Parliament and the Armed Forces minister between 2010 and 2012, said figures that emerged last week <\/span>in a think tank report on potential British cuts were pretty much in line with his understanding at the time of his departure from the MoD. <\/p>\n\n\n\n “The Royal United Services Institute [RUSI] work accords very much with my recollection of the figures when I left the MoD over two years ago. … By the end of the [next] Parliament, with no more defense cuts at all, the gap between the defense budget and what is likely to be 2 percent of the GDP by 2019 will be getting toward \u00a36 billion,” Harvey said.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “This is why neither George Osborne [the chancellor of the Exchequer] or anybody else has been in any great hurry to commit firmly to the 2 percent because of the sums of money which will have to be found to achieve that,” he told reporters during a briefing March 11.<\/p>\n\n\n\n None of the leading political parties have so far committed to maintaining NATO spending levels beyond the next financial year.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ahead of a general election scheduled for May 7, a major row has broken out here over potentially significant defense spending cuts as part of an expected new round of austerity measures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n “We know a lot more needs to be done to tackle the deficit and as yet nobody [in government] has come forward and suggested defense can be protected from that, and therefore some very painful decisions look likely to be facing whoever the ministers are,” Harvey said. “If you think we faced some pretty unpalatable choices in the 2010 strategic defense and security review, and we certainly did, then I can see it is going to be every bit as difficult this time around.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n In 2010, the government axed Harrier jump jets, maritime patrol aircraft, surface warships and other capabilities as well as slashing equipment programs and personnel numbers as part of an effort <\/span>to reduce defense spending. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Harvey added, however, said though <\/span>that like in 2010, defense would not “get the worst of what’s coming in the comprehensive spending review because it’s an unstable world.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n A government spokesperson declined to address the possible \u00a36 billion shortfall but said, “Decisions on spending after the financial year 2015-16 will be determined in the next spending review.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n The question of whether Britain will continue to meet or beat the NATO spending target has become a central issue in the row that has involved politicians, retired senior officers and others. Even US President Barrack Obama and US Army Chief Gen. Ray Odierno have voiced their concerns.<\/p>\n\n\n\n