Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Whitepaper on Defence 2015

Options
  • 26-08-2015 10:17am
    #1
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 8,467 CMod ✭✭✭✭


    The new White Paper on Defence is being published this morning.

    The allocation of new equipment for the Army, Air Corps & Navy has been earmarked.

    Ireland is about to seriously bulk up the Defence Forces


«1

Comments

  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Just a new thread to discuss:

    Being launched at 11am - i.e. right now.

    heres coveneys update from his FB page:

    https://www.facebook.com/SimonCoveney/posts/1156902867658714

    Synopsis as borrowed from another site - personal thanks to the poster there:
    2 bdes staying
    min 9500 establishment
    RDF developed to maintain viability (specialist skills)
    triple lock staying
    upgrade/replacement of MOWAGs
    enhance ARW (strength)
    replace Eithne & Peacocks
    replace Cessnas and CASAs
    gender focused
    UNTSI developed
    employment support scheme for 30-40 young disadvantaged

    When funds allow radar surveillance, additional ships and AD
    The following is an brief outline of the New White Paper on Defence which sets out Defence Policy for Ireland for the next decade.
    White Paper on Defence
    26th August 2015
    Overview
    The White Paper on Defence will provide the defence policy framework for the next decade.
    It sets out an assessment of and the Government’s approach to dealing with a dynamic security environment. The White Paper considers the defence policy requirements for defence of the state, domestic security supports and international peace and security supports.
    The White Paper also sets out the defence provision of a range of non-security supports. These maximise the utility of defence assets and improve the value from money achieved from defence expenditure.
    The roles assigned to the Defence Forces are updated to reflect the Government’s policy requirements.
    The White Paper sets out key capability decisions. The development of flexible and adaptive military capabilities is a pragmatic approach to dealing with future uncertainty and the roles assigned. The Reserve Defence Force will be developed to ensure its continued viability and Civil Defence will continue to be supported in providing important emergency supports.
    The White Paper also introduces new proposals including the development of a new Institute for Peace Support and Leadership Training at the Curragh and the development of a new employment support scheme.
    A new programme of fixed cycle reviews will be introduced. This will enhance overall preparedness in terms of Defence planning.
    Context
    The White Paper was developed following an extensive consultation process. This was initiated by the publication of a Green Paper on Defence initiated by the then Minister for Defence, Alan Shatter T.D. There were 122 written submissions and follow on meetings. On 15th May 2015 an open policy debate was held in Farleigh House and on 30th June 2015, Dáil statements provided an opportunity for final inputs from stakeholders.
    Fundamentals
    Security is the bedrock on which a society’s achievements are built. The White Paper sets out a comprehensive and forward looking assessment of the security environment. This was prepared by an interdepartmental group.
    Today’s world is more interconnected than ever before and events overseas can have significant reverberations at home. The security assessment considers a broad range of threats and provides the context for the defence policy response.
    A range of government departments and state agencies are responsible for leading and planning for the response to the threats identified in the security assessment. Membership of and engagement with national and international organisations are central to responding to the threats identified.
    The policy response outlined in the White Paper situates the defence contribution to security. As well as providing for the Defence of the State from armed aggression, this includes supports to An Garda Síochána, the defence contribution to international peace and security and the defence contribution to major emergencies and civil contingencies.
    Ireland’s engagement in international peace and security operations will be pursued within Ireland’s traditional policy of military neutrality. Deployment of Defence Forces’ personnel on peace support missions will continue to be in accordance with relevant legislation, which contains the requirement for Government, Dáil and UN approval, known as the “triple-lock”.
    The Defence Forces will continue to deliver a broad range of security supports at home including EOD responses and on request armed support to An Garda Síochána. Options to enhance co-operation amongst those departments and agencies with responsibilities in the maritime domain will be explored.
    The defence contribution to cyber security in support of the Department of Communications Energy and Natural Resources new cyber security strategy and other Defence contributions to major emergencies/crises, including the work of the Office of Emergency Planning, is set out.
    The Defence Forces will continue to provide support to departments and state agencies, across a broad range of non-security related roles. The Defence Forces will also continue to play a significant role in ceremonial events, including those for the centenary of 1916 and other State commemorative events.
    These requirements have been reflected in updated roles assigned to the Defence Forces.
    Capability Requirements
    The White Paper considers future capability requirements having regard to the types of operations that the Defence Forces may be required to undertake in the coming years.
    The government have committed to:
    Maintain the PDF establishment at least at 9,500 personnel.
    Retain existing two Brigade Army structure and Air Corps and Naval Service structures.
    Review high level Command and Control arrangements.
    On the equipment front, the immediate requirement is to ensure that the Defence Forces can continue to undertake the tasks that are required of them. This will require replacement of significant equipment platforms over the life-time of the White Paper.
    Upgrade or replacement of the Army’s fleet of armoured personnel carriers (APCs)
    Measures will be taken to further enhance the capabilities of the Army Ranger Wing, in particular with the aim of increasing the strength of the Unit considerably.
    Replacement of a further three Naval Service Vessels – The LÉ Eithne, the LÉ Ciara and the LÉ Orla
    Replacement of the Air Corps Cessna fleet and CASA maritime patrol aircraft.
    Other equipment priorities have also been identified in the event of additional funding becoming available (beyond that required to replace existing capabilities). This includes radar surveillance capability for the Air Corps, further ships for the Naval Service and additional armoured vehicles and air defence capabilities for the Army.
    Measures will be taken to further enhance the capabilities of the Army Ranger Wing in particular with the aim of increasing the strength of the unit considerably.
    Human Resources are a key component of capability and the White Paper sets out an ambitious programme in order to ensure that the Defence Organisation can continue to meet the challenges of a changing world.
    It includes a section dealing with Veterans and the support that the Veterans Organisations will receive from the Department and the Defence Forces.
    The service of members of the Reserve is valued and the Reserve Defence Force will be developed to ensure its continued viability. This includes a proposal that where specialist skills gaps exist in the PDF, that consideration be given to engaging Reservists for relevant projects.
    The members of Civil Defence provide essential supports in time of need and Civil Defence will also be developed to ensure that it can continue to deliver the required supports.
    New Thinking
    A new process of fixed cycle defence reviews is to be established. This will assure foresight, flexibility, poise and overall preparedness in terms of defence planning and provision.
    A specific defence funding study will be established to capture in a new way the expected long-term costs of meeting Ireland’s defence requirements using a ten year planning horizon linked to the proposed new framework of fixed cycle reviews. The study will be completed by end 2015 and will provide the evidence base to establish a more evolved approach to defence funding,
    The Department will engage with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, the Department of Justice and Equality and An Garda Síochána to explore the contribution of gender focused measures, particularly in relation to the deployment of female personnel. This is an area that the Secretary General of the United Nations recently called upon Ireland to further support.
    The Government have authorised the evaluation of a new concept involving the potential development of a new Institute for Peace Support and Leadership Training, at the Defence Forces Training Centre in the Curragh. It is foreseen that the new institute would have international standing and contribute to the overall development of knowledge and experience in the areas of peace support and conflict resolution. Work on the concept will be developed over the coming 12 months with a view to it being showcased in 2016.
    A panel of members of the Reserve Defence Force with specialist professional skills will be established. Engagement of these personnel will be one of the options considered in addressing any skills gaps that emerge in the Permanent Defence Force.
    Engagement by the Defence organisation in innovation, research and product development will be further developed over the lifetime of the White Paper, through the Defence Enterprise Initiative.
    A new employment support scheme, with the direct involvement of the Defence Forces, is being developed. This will be aimed at people in the 18-24 age range who might otherwise struggle to break out of cycles of disadvantage. It will provide an opportunity for them to participate in an employment focused skills development programme provided by the Defence Forces. The scheme will be developed in consultation with key stakeholders, including the Department of Social Protection. Subject to finalisation of details, an initial pilot involving 30-40 participants will take place in 2016.
    Conclusion
    Forward looking and Strategic document that provides a flexible framework to deal with uncertainty.
    Task of implementation has already commenced.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    The new White Paper on Defence is being published this morning.

    The allocation of new equipment for the Army, Air Corps & Navy has been earmarked.

    Ireland is about to seriously bulk up the Defence Forces

    That Journal headline is woefully inaccurate. For the most part the message coming from this WP is steady as she goes.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 4,024 ✭✭✭Owryan


    The new White Paper on Defence is being published this morning.

    The allocation of new equipment for the Army, Air Corps & Navy has been earmarked.

    Ireland is about to seriously bulk up the Defence Forces

    No sign of bulking up from what I quickly read. Ship for ship replacement, 5 cessenas replaced by 3 larger aircraft. The 2 CASA' s to be replaced. Some mention of new apc's and ltavs but not whether to increase the fleet or as replacements.

    At least the rdf has a new defined role: ceremonial function.

    As a former member of the flr was interested to see the suggestion that a period of annual training was being considered. Just wind it up or integrate it into the rdf ffs


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Very modest in its ambition..... No 'bulking up' at all.

    Foreign deployments still decided by the Kremlin, Beijing & Washington, (a bizzare concept).

    What is deficient with the MOWAGs?
    What would be the requirements for their upgrade/replacement.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    Foreign deployments still decided by the Kremlin, Beijing & Washington, (a bizzare concept).

    Well no, that's not true. We place the requirement of UN approval on ourselves, we could lift such an arbitrary rule tomorrow (or at least when the Dáil reconvenes).

    I'll admit the "triple lock" is silly but this notion that the P5 have a veto over the deployment of our Defence Forces is quite frankly absurd.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Ren2k7 wrote: »
    Well no, that's not true. We place the requirement of UN approval on ourselves, we could lift such an arbitrary rule tomorrow (or at least when the Dáil reconvenes).

    I'll admit the "triple lock" is silly but this notion that the P5 have a veto over the deployment of our Defence Forces is quite frankly absurd.

    While it seems absurd, as long as the rule exists, its real, factual and smacks of idiocy in that a modern nation would create a roadblock of red tape like this in the first place. With the country so recently full of socialists and left leaning tree huggers , I dont see it going anywhere fast either. It is now embedded in the national psyche as representative of the imaginary neutrality they pretend we have.

    Indeed sinn feins defence policy (read: hokey pokey) was titled positive neutrality - and they very well may end up in a majority powersharing govt at some point in the future.

    Saying that, as positive neutrality involves disarming ones military, they might go ahead and clean up their own backyard first.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Very modest in its ambition..... No 'bulking up' at all.

    Foreign deployments still decided by the Kremlin, Beijing & Washington, (a bizzare concept).

    What is deficient with the MOWAGs?
    What would be the requirements for their upgrade/replacement.

    Could it be in regards to their IED protections? Do our ones have the V hull modifications, I know we don't have cage armour.

    I see for example that the latest Generation of the Piranha is being selected by some EU nations right now for replacements.

    And yes the Triple Lock remains a most useless sop to the PANA nutters.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Ren2k7 wrote: »
    We place the requirement of UN approval on ourselves, we could lift such an arbitrary rule tomorrow (or at least when the Dáil reconvenes).

    All rules are self-made no?

    While the rule exists, for good or ill, its still odd that military deployment requires 3rd party nation endorsement.
    sparky42 wrote: »
    Could it be in regards to their IED protections? Do our ones have the V hull modifications, I know we don't have cage armour.
    Cage armour would be an improvement at relatively modest cost alright.

    Does the army have issues with the relatively modest carrying capability?
    It carries just 5 troops, doesn't it?


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    Morpheus wrote: »
    While it seems absurd, as long as the rule exists, its real, factual and smacks of idiocy in that a modern nation would create a roadblock of red tape like this in the first place. With the country so recently full of socialists and left leaning tree huggers , I dont see it going anywhere fast either. It is now embedded in the national psyche as representative of the imaginary neutrality they pretend we have.

    Those rules were put into place by FF/FG/LAB. Socialists, the left or SF had no role in the 60+ years of arbitrary neutrality.
    Morpheus wrote: »
    Indeed sinn feins defence policy (read: hokey pokey) was titled positive neutrality - and they very well may end up in a majority powersharing govt at some point in the future.

    I fail to see what invoking SF has to do with this thread TBH. Though they couldn't be any worse than the current shower of incompetents who have for decades maintained a token force that's completely ill equipped to do anything more than basic peacekeeping. When Irish citizens were being slaughtered wholesale in the North by Loyalist death squads our DF was nowhere to be seen. The British were offering to give Derry City and South Armagh to the Republic but we had no means of taking up occupation duties there because, well we had sod all of a force to begin with.
    Morpheus wrote: »
    Saying that, as positive neutrality involves disarming ones military, they might go ahead and clean up their own backyard first.

    No, positive neutrality involves actually maintaining a credible military force like in Sweden, Finland and Austria.

    And if you have evidence SF maintains active links with the Provos then I would encourage you to go to your nearest Garda/Police station with your findings.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    All rules are self-made no?

    While the rule exists, for good or ill, its still odd that military deployment requires 3rd party nation endorsement.

    We require no such "3rd party nation endorsement" to deploy our military. It's a self imposed requirement. No country has a veto on our DF's.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    Ren2k7 wrote: »
    No, positive neutrality involves actually maintaining a credible military force like in Sweden, Finland and Austria.

    I've read Shinner doctrine on defence..... it makes no mention of the level of investment required to match Sweden with its 120 MBTs, 500 IFVs & 1,500+ APCs.

    But, we digress.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    I've read Shinner doctrine on defence..... it makes no mention of the level of investment required to match Sweden with its 120 MBTs, 500 IFVs & 1,500+ APCs.

    But, we digress.

    Yes, we digress. SF have been no different in its defence policy than any other political party. It's not that long ago where we all were asked to stop bringing party politics into this forum so let's abide by that request please.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Have you read their "defence" policy? I have, cover to cover.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Cage armour would be an improvement at relatively modest cost alright.

    Does the army have issues with the relatively modest carrying capability?
    It carries just 5 troops, doesn't it?

    I would have thought that with the draw down in operations/budgets we might have been able to pick up some cheap second hand from other operators at the very least.

    I think the squad sizes have been coming down for the IFV's, think the CV90 has something the same as well.


  • Registered Users Posts: 12,248 ✭✭✭✭BoJack Horseman


    sparky42 wrote: »
    I think the squad sizes have been coming down for the IFV's, think the CV90 has something the same as well.

    I know IFV's have been relegating their troop carrier capability to take on other roles, like twin mortars, 105mm gun etc....

    However isnt there a trend internationally for APC's to be able to carry a full squad?

    Thinking of the turkish 'Pars' apc boasts 11 dismounts.
    The Finish Patria AMV carrys 12.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    I know IFV's have been relegating their troop carrier capability to take on other roles, like twin mortars, 105mm gun etc....

    However isnt there a trend internationally for APC's to be able to carry a full squad?

    Thinking of the turkish 'Pars' apc boasts 11 dismounts.
    The Finish Patria AMV carrys 12.

    But hulls like the Warrior are 7 dismounts, the US Marine's Lav25 is 4 dismounts, so I ghuess it just depends, the new generation Piranha I think is about the same as the two you've quoted.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,877 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34




  • Registered Users Posts: 23,877 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Helicopter Patrol Vessels (HPV)
    The LÉ Eithne, which is the current flagship and a HPV, will be replaced by a multi-role vessel (MRV). Whilst this ship will not carry a helicopter, it will be enabled for helicopter operations and will also have a freight carrying capacity

    FFS.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,877 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    The whole exercise can be summed up with the phrase:
    Should additional funding, beyond that required to maintain existing capabilities become available......

    That goes for armour, mechanisation, AD radar, intercept capability, MATS etc etc etc

    Its 200 pages of 'as you were', all they are trying to do is reprofile the DF diversity ratios and return the pay/operations ratio in the DF budget to 70:30 from 73:27


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    FFS.

    Yeah, it's a bit like the Yanks building an aircraft carrier and forgetting to buy fighter aircraft for it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,161 ✭✭✭Ren2k7


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    The whole exercise can be summed up with the phrase:



    That goes for armour, mechanisation, AD radar, intercept capability, MATS etc etc etc

    Its 200 pages of 'as you were', all they are trying to do is reprofile the DF diversity ratios and return the pay/operations ratio in the DF budget to 70:30 from 73:27

    The entire thing's a load of waffling PR without a shred of substance.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,045 ✭✭✭OzCam


    Ren2k7 wrote: »
    Yeah, it's a bit like the Yanks building an aircraft carrier and forgetting to buy fighter aircraft for it.

    That would actually be our other friends, across the Irish Sea not the Atlantic.

    Dismount loads for modern APCs might have something to do with internal space being reduced due to bigger engines, more armour, better spall protection, better seats, more radios and bucketloads of other electronic gear, and also soldiers being bigger, better fed and trained, wearing body armour, vests, personal radios etc etc. I doubt very much that the hull sizes have changed all that much. (Though apparently the Boxer is bloody huge.)

    The OT-64, designed in the 60's, theoretically had room for 18 dismounts... though they were probably skinny 18-y-o conscripts with boots, helmets, a uniform, an AK and a couple of mags and not much else. Packed in like sardines. And it's as close to a Piranha in size as makes no difference.

    Excellent point about the cost of the Swedish armoured fleet. Even the Swedes can't afford that anymore.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,968 ✭✭✭aindriu80


    Larbre34 wrote: »
    FFS.

    LOL. Ship - helicopter capable - no helicopter supplied !

    As for the white paper, I am very glad to see (ONLY) the second white paper to come out. Biggest thing is probably the recognition from the government that Defence is worthwhile and something Ireland needs to do. Seeing that our spending is sooo low things can only improve in the years ahead.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,877 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    aindriu80 wrote: »
    Seeing that our spending is sooo low things can uonly improve in the years ahead.

    You would think so, but everything is sacrificial if there are no votes in it.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 2,688 Mod ✭✭✭✭Morpheus


    Meanwhile the Dept Of Health wants 2 BILLION more in next budget to just stand still

    That hoovers up every last penny saved over the last year IN THE ENTIRE GOVT BUDGET!

    all of this, WITHOUT undergoing a review of best practices and efficiency by any non governmental body (like the dept of defence underwent) and without having conformed and provided the long promised improvements in working practices that year on year have failed to materialise.


  • Registered Users Posts: 23,877 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Morpheus wrote: »
    Meanwhile the Dept Of Health wants 2 BILLION more in next budget to just stand still

    That hoovers up every last penny saved over the last year IN THE ENTIRE GOVT BUDGET!

    all of this, WITHOUT undergoing a review of best practices and efficiency by any non governmental body (like the dept of defence underwent) and without having conformed and provided the long promised improvements in working practices that year on year have failed to materialise.

    Here's your problem. They will have to finally tackle this nonsense in a meaningful way, whether thats redundancy or performance management.

    http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/spike-in-number-of-top-earners-in-the-hse-31489463.html


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Morpheus wrote: »
    Meanwhile the Dept Of Health wants 2 BILLION more in next budget to just stand still

    That hoovers up every last penny saved over the last year IN THE ENTIRE GOVT BUDGET!

    all of this, WITHOUT undergoing a review of best practices and efficiency by any non governmental body (like the dept of defence underwent) and without having conformed and provided the long promised improvements in working practices that year on year have failed to materialise.

    Well, it wants. What it gets may be a different result, but yes the Department of Health is a bottomless pit that consumes everything it gets without ever producing anything close to value for money. But short of disbanding the entire organisation and getting some internaitonal body to rebuild a replacement that's not going to change.


  • Registered Users Posts: 283 ✭✭Grassy Knoll


    I hope the Kabul crisis in the past few weeks will see the authorities bring some modest level of improvement in the equipment to the defence forces, the Aer Corps in particular… we are better than the beggar man of Europe routine we regularly play out in defence matters … as an island nation some form of independent airlift capability as we have seen in the past year or so is necessary tool for a modern sovereign nation.

    The goodwill of others and professional approach of the ARW got us out of a hole … the fact Macron was visiting Ireland this week may have got us a lift there and back. Better we be some way self sufficient as you can be in these things … indeed the remaining folks in Afghanistan may have to leave through non orthodox methods so airlift may be required again



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,891 ✭✭✭sparky42


    Looking at the comments from Coveney on Primetime... Nope.



Advertisement