El Malvinense

[wolf-one]

We cannot guarantee the Falklands’ security

SIR – It is true that the Falkland Islands are better defended now than in 1982 (Leading article, December 22), but the defences are not strong enough to deter invasion. There are just four jet fighters on the islands and these could be quickly overwhelmed by a mass attack, even by inferior aircraft.

The only guarantee of security for the Falklands would be an assurance that reinforcements could be in place in time to deter an invasion or, if invaded, that the islands could be retaken. This we can no longer give. The recovery of the Falklands in 1982 was only possible because the Royal Navy was able to send two aircraft carriers with Sea Harriers.

It would be impractical to garrison the islands sufficiently or to have sufficient air and naval forces stationed there to deter invasion. The service personnel needed would outnumber the local population.

The danger of losing the Falklands is the most pressing of the problems raised by the disastrous Strategic Defence and Security Review of 2010. But money does exist for defence, as the bloated overseas aid budget proves, with recipients of our largesse including India and Pakistan, both of whom have substantial armed forces and expensive re-equipment programmes.

Our weakness is driven home by the fact that the Argentine navy is intercepting and boarding vessels fishing legally in Falklands’ waters. Nothing is being done about this because we lack sufficient warships and maritime reconnaissance aircraft to enforce our rights to these waters. In other times, Argentina’s actions would have amounted to an act of war.