There was once a time in history when the British would've dispatched 10 of the most advanced warships in the world to deal with this threat, crazy how we have fallen struggling to send even one frigate.
A very visual example of what successive governments have done to this country for the purpose of short term political gain or personal wealth for themselves or their cronies.
This is the result of long-term defence cuts and a cultural attitude shift (veering into the widespread ignorance and outright apathy from large swathes of the apparently bovine general public) The Royal Navy can barely operate the tragically low number of hulls (particularly MSCs, that is, Major Surface Combatants) it has and any suggestion of major expansion is tutted down by the usual armchair admirals and naysayers clinging to the ingrained notions and perception problems which decades upon decades of the shrinking Royal Navy has engendered. It's a sad state of affairs. The overall GDP% share the _entire_ UK military gets is sitting at about 2.1% nominally, though in real-terms going into next year it's probably more like 2.2-2.3% with plans to be at 2.5% by 2025-2027 ish. In previous eras, the UK would casually be spending >10% GDP on the military. Moaning Michaels taking the mickey have been penny pinching for years. The out of touch politicians, generation to generation, think they are smart by scrimping and saving and making small cuts. Those small cuts add up. It is the kind of thing which I'm sure Admiral Cunningham of WWII fame, would have been horrified by. “It takes three years to build a ship; it takes three centuries to build a tradition.” - Admiral Cunningham, regarding the costly British naval operations in the evacuation of Crete.
@@Furthermore26 Man it is almost like the UK is not that big of a country and doesn't have the resources their former imperial self had that they extracted from their colonies
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say that the US Navy had some sort of presence in the area. Why wouldn’t the Royal Navy request Assistance from there BFF.? Anybody have any thoughts?
Watching the UK Government completely f*ck up spending in every department is truly depressing… the UK’s Military was once a mighty force. Now due to budget cuts we’ve taken a backseat and seem to just be happy to carry on like it. In our public sector it’s the same, add on the absolute chaos which is the Bank of England right now, cost of living, house prices, inflation etc. and you have the perfect recipe to ruin a nation. I really hope we’re able to somehow get out of this mess, but if I’m being honest I don’t see it happening any time soon. Everyone in power is an absolute melon.
It's honestly shameful what successive governments have done to this country. I partially blame the media for placating the public into voting in the same lot that would struggle to hold down a job outside of politics.
@ronanmcn4967 while that is true, the lot that we've got in the past ~5 years are significantly worse. Right now we have an NPC for PM, and every other week we seem to have an MP getting caught with his hand in the petty change tin.
Stealing another countries ship / cargo and expecting them not to respond pretty dumb. Somehow international laws applied to the British ship but not the Iranian ship? Ok buddy
I feel like blaming this on the british government solely is unfair. whilst i agree alot of blame rests on them, the disregard for protocol by the crew of the MV Stena imperio is why this happened to them (its likely it would have happened to a ship, but their disregard is why it was them)
Where is the data for this? The Royal Navy is considerably larger and more powerful than the Australia and Canada's navies and has a growing budget. The Royal Navy has some amazing units coming to fruition in the next 5-10 years.
Not true. Agree that the UK needs to up its navy a fair amount but Canada and Australia are only replacing ships like for like over the next decade and dont have half the capability that the UK has with its carriers, nuke subs, logistical force etc. Only including larger vessels (say over 1,000t+) the UK between 2010-2030 has gotten/will get 2x super carriers, 7x nuclear attack subs, 6x destroyers, 18x frigates, 5x large patrol ships, 4x naval tankers, 3x naval supply ships, and a few special purpose survey/surveillance/drone ships. Also longer term (2030-2040) first orders/plans for 4x SSBN, 6x amphibious landing dock ships and a future larger destroyer class. Canada has not received a new frigate or destroyer for around 15 years and wont receive a new one until its up to 15x new frigates enter service after 2030, 0x carriers or amphibious assault ships and none planned, 4x old diesel subs that wont be replaced until after 2030 by a new either diesel or nuclear class depending on what its crappy government procurement allows (hopefully they will join AUKUS), building around half a dozen lightly armed arctic patrol ships, received 1x converted naval supply ship, and building 2x new naval supply ships. Australia is a bit better with 9x new frigates ordered but not coming until after 2030, 3x new destroyers, 2x new small helicopter carriers, 2x new supply ships, and 6x diesel subs that are planned to be replaced by up to 12x nuclear attack subs but the first wont arrive until after 2030 and they wont have say at least half a dozen of them until the 2040s.
Neither off those navies have nuclear armed and or powered subs active, neither have aircraft carries neither have a significant logistical support and supply fleet there is pros and cons to every thing the UKs naval budget has went elsewhere
There was a forces news crew filming another one of those life on a navy ship type documentarys aboard Duncan It’s easily found on RU-vid. Having already seen it. It gives a cool perspective of the situation from Duncan’s pov
Honest question, am I missing something or didn't both countries break international law? The video mentions EU sanctions, not UN sanctions and the waters in the middle of the Gibraltar Strait are also international.
Have you seen the gap into the Gibraltar strait? Did the ship pass that gap? Then it was in British waters. We've been doing this shit for centuries. Listen to every radio message in this video again, and tell me the British don't know protocol. We effing invented it.
@@stevenmacdonald9619 its probably just wording, but at 3:30 in the vid, he says that after the royal marine team took control of the vessel it was moved north into gibraltar's territorial waters. indicating, based off wording, that it wasn't before that.
@@kukajin9560I agree with you and I have the same question as OP. It seems both cases would violate international maritime law based on the descriptions throughout the video. Why would Iran be treated differently? Isn’t the UKs infraction justification for some kind of retaliation? What’s better than literally the exact same thing?
Except for its far eastern end, the Strait lies within the territorial waters of Spain and Morocco. The United Kingdom claims 3 nautical miles (5.6 km; 3.5 mi) around Gibraltar on the northern side of the Strait, putting part of it inside British territorial waters. As this is less than the 12 nautical miles (22 km; 14 mi) maximum, it means, according to the British claim, that part of the Strait lies in international waters. The ownership of Gibraltar and its territorial waters is disputed by Spain. Similarly, Morocco disputes Spanish sovereignty over Ceuta on the southern coast.[31] There are several islets, such as the disputed Isla Perejil, that are claimed by both Morocco and Spain. Under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, vessels passing through the strait do so under the regime of transit passage, rather than the more limited innocent passage allowed in most territorial waters. Therefore, a vessel or aircraft has the freedom of navigation or overflight for the purpose of crossing the strait of Gibraltar. Transit passage is a concept of the law of the sea, which allows a vessel or aircraft the freedom of navigation or overflight solely for the purpose of continuous and expeditious transit of a strait between one part of the high seas or exclusive economic zone and another. The requirement of continuous and expeditious transit does not preclude passage through the strait for the purpose of entering, leaving or returning from a state bordering the strait, subject to the conditions of entry to that state. The transit passage may be exercised regardless of the nationality (flag) of the ship, its form of ownership, the merchant or government status of a ship or warship, the private or government status of an aircraft
It's such a shame that the government, and governments from the last 30+ years on both sides have kept cutting our armed forces budget restricting us and leaving us a weak member of NATO. We absolutely need to increase funding and create new air, land and sea vehicles to protect ourselves and help our NATO families around the world.
Hence why we’re seeing the service getting an increase in capability through the new frigates with the addition of the type 31 and 32 designs I imagine that escort coverage could be increased hopefully
Not like I was expecting this to not be a biased video against Iran, but hey what can I say, right?🤣. I'm just glad that Iran was able to do the tit for the tat that the UK did. "International laws for thee but not for mee!, when I want anything done I can just modify the so called 'international laws' to make sure I can get it"
Really hoping to see the navy increase in size soon, make it apparent that it intends to expand, let more people apply and make it apparent that they are recruiting so we can get more people for it as well, tho I’d say do that when those new ships get close to completion so when they’re ready for sea trials we have some people ready to go
The RN is due to increase in the 2030s. The AUKUS pact is planning to increase the size of the submarine fleet, and the escort fleet is going to be larger when the type 26s/31s/32s are made. Despite all the pessimism, the RN does have a lot to be optimistic about. Trouble is...we need these numbers yesterday. With all that is going on, Iran, Russia, and probably a Taiwan conflict within the next few years...2030s seems like a distant future.
I never understood the Cameron budget cuts that gutted the armed forces, and especially the navy. I'm not being political or anything, that just stands out as particularly dumb. And the lack of foresight by the government of the day no to prioritise escort duties and realise Iran wasn't bluffing. I remember watching this unfold and thinking 'they can't be this dumb"...
The problem for the English people is they think they are on the same league as the big boys (China, US, Russia or even the next big countries such as Germany, Japan, etc)
Its funny seeing them get pissed off that another country is willing to stick it up to them after violating international law. Britain isnt the top dog anymore, it cant bully other nations as easily
Am I the only one that is against seizures of shipping? Whether it be Iranian or otherwise. What the British did was wrong. What the Iranians did was wrong.
I see. I hope the United Kingdom of Great Britain does not forget that it has friends and allies very close by. Norway is your biggest fanboy, Sweden feels generally friendly towards you and also wants to honor Norways intentions and wishes. I also know we have Denmark supporting us in this matter. (våga inte säga emot mig i det här, danskjävlar
Leaving the EU was never due to anti European sentiment. I hope perhaps that we can all work economically, politically, and militarilaliy towards common goals as EQUALS.
Agree no way was it to do with any type of European resentment, it was about controlling, and taking back our own borders and living to our own rules and not being dictated to, absolutely nothing to to with our european cousins especially our nordic brethrens who we shall always be fond of and share a common ancient bond with?, thank you for your kind words my Norwegian brother, its rare these days for any nation to be saying anything nice about brits anymore..wassail and untill we meet in the mead hall of valhalla!! and to those that dont like us, "BAG AN NOZ", 👍
Moral of the story. Stop being the police of the world, stay at home. Let the merchant ships do their work. No ships, no economy, the world will grind to a hault. Keep politics away from merchant shipping.
You may have forgotten that on March 23, 2007, 15 crew members of the British Royal Navy's HMS Cornwall frigate were captured by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps. tell me about it
Even with 1000 ships, how would you effectively prevent boarding via helicopter? Shooting at it could lead to retaliation, which creates another problem: what happens when they shoot back? Furthermore, why didn't you include the communications of the Sepah Navy missile boat that challenged the British warship? The audio you provided only covered the speedboats and the initial contact. In the actual communication, the Sepah Navy missile boat warned the British frigate, saying, "British warship Foxtrot 236, this is Sepah Navy warship... your tanker British Heritage is under my control. You are ordered not to interfere in my operation." The speedboats were not intended to deter the British warship; they are patrol boats, after all. It would have made more sense to challenge the single missile boat instead of deploying an entire armada. A frigate should be more than capable of confronting a missile boat. The issue at hand is not a lack of ships, but rather the fact that you were not challenged by a defenseless country as you might be accustomed to. Additionally, in the case of the British, for every ship you take, they retaliate by seizing two of yours. It seems you forgot to mention the second ship, Mesdar, which was also involved in the incident.
Lets not forget the beginning of the video, the Iranian ship was also travelling on international waters before being directed into Gibraltar territorial waters. Same thing happened to the British ship so i think its even and squared. EU is not UN.
Yeah, usually the EU thinks they can dictate for the rest of the world. Disgusting hypocrites seize something which isn’t theirs and then cry over it when it happens to them
I would say this incident was quite the black eye for the royal navy. They were there to help, and the impero depended on the royal navy to come to the aid and help them. Only for a spineless commander to not do so. The royal navy failed the crew, and the Montrose failed at their duty that day
Yes, because it actually ended up going to Syria anyway. Iran lied and turned off transmitters. It was tracked by satellite at Syria. So yes, it was good legal.
Its really sad that the Royal Navy, the Navy that once ruled the waves and therefore basically the world, that exported safety to allies and trading partners around the world, is now relegated to this, not even being able to protect her own shipping
Does Gibraltar owns the strate? If EU wanna sanction some state, it is free to do so but it shouldn't impose it on other states' relationships with the sanctioned state.
Note the UK British Army Chief just handed in his resignation , same reason , the total lack of a proper defence capability to include the general state of the British Army !
Might not need that many ships if "international law" was not what you deemed on a day to day basis. Quit stealing others ships, then others may not steal yours in return. Pretty simple.
Someone else explained how this act was a violation of international law by Britian. No UN sancions against Syria were present, and the ship was captured in international waters. Not only that, but the water around Gibraltar are a disputed territory between Spain and Britian.
It was EU sanctions Britain was upholding. And the Iranians were violating international law by disrupting passage of a merchant vessel. The Law of Sea Convention declares the right of innocent passage for merchant and military vessels Not only that but the Stena Impero was transiting Omani waters at the time it was hijacked. Meaning the Iranian Navy were operating in foreign waters. Which goes against the LOSC as attacking foreign ships would not fall under innocent passage And territorial water disputes in the Strait are Spain getting upset at everyone else, and frequently sending patrol vessels in Moroccan and British waters just to piss people off
Another reason why we need to expand the Royal Navy. We have too few MSCs (Major Surface Combatants) These situations would be completely avoidable if we had a significantly greater number of hulls and active MSCs. It's not good enough to be putting solitary ships like HMS _Montrose_ (which by the way, has recently been withdrawn from service, after a long service history) in such risk. These Iranian opportunists were acting like they'd 'defeated' the Royal Navy. If it came down to an actual fight we know the Royal Navy would win. It's just typical brinkmanship and aggro from the Iranians. They burn a British flag from time to time and puff up their chest in the Persian Gulf. Didn't they also build a fake carrier which sank? The British government are a disgrace.
@@TheBritishEmpire920 The entire _Duke_-class is nearing it's end of service. HMS _Montrose_ was recently decommissioned herself. Those Type 23 or _Duke_-class still operating, won't be forever. The Type 26 _City_-class and Type 31 _Inspiration_-class are replacing them, but they aren't being built fast enough.
@@TheBritishEmpire920 i) Thank you for your service (I know that's kind of an American thing to say, but wow, what can I say, thank you for serving our country) I'm not American, I'm British and English, but I'm saying it's more like something the Americans say, but in this case, fearing sounding patronising, I wanted to just say thank you anyway. Honestly, well done and what a great thing you're doing for the UK. ii) I totally agree about that, not just because it is sensible and safer for there to be more British ships out there (and let's face it, like Britain or not, a lot of other countries would have to admit it would make their own shipping safer, and make their own contractors and civilian crews feel better, no matter what they'll actually admit to us out loud - they'd be like 'thankfully the British are out here' deep down, even if they wouldn't say it; and don't get me wrong, a lot would as well inversely) It's also practical due to less sea stresses on the hulls. One hull being worked that hard is going to be strained more than it should be, and this ages the ship faster. Sort of like fighter jets in Taiwan being deliberately trolled by China by having them sortie to intercept their illegal airspace incursions on a literally daily basis. It ages their airframes faster. That is the point, besides aggravating the West and Taiwan, and testing reaction times (though in the long-run, all that will do is ensure many Chinese pilots will be lost in that exchange, due to how well-versed the Taiwanese had become at doing that; so the trade off is surely, mostly meant to just be a geopolitical flex and a shortening of the service spans of the actual aircraft themselves, on a mechanical and engineering level) The more British ships that can share the burden in one operational area, the lighter the strain on each hull while doing twice, thrice or four times as much. It's typical of the British government to ignore such realities. It's why we should have a third carrier, but are struggling to man two without denuding the rest of the fleet. The bottom line, is that the entire RN needs a) a lot more money b) a lot more personnel without that rate of money increases slowing (so, even more money on top as it expands; that's just how it is) When they are building £18.8 Billion train lines which just go through London (London Crossrail) and when they are spending ~£108 Billion on HS2 railways and terminals, in an even bigger railway project, then I'm not really going to cry about billions more being spent on the RN when it should be! iii) Sadly the British government is still the biggest and most persistent foe of RN warships. They deign to be saving the taxpayer money while robbing everyone blind anyway, and lining their own pockets for silly things. I'd much rather have the RN expanded properly _without_ losing quality, no matter the price. The sad thing is, the attitude of the general public is basically dogpoo at this point due to being messed around so long by the government and HMRC.
@@TheBritishEmpire920 P. S. - by which I mean, the lack of public awareness about the naval requirements of the UK, is partly due to the apathy and ignorance which comes through a lifetime of the government and lying politicians, further jading the general public. There'd be more patriots if there was less political corruption; hence more money and general knowledge in the public, about the needs of the RN. I'm convinced that, no matter how corrupt, stupid or indolent the government itself is, there is also a level of it coming from the oblivious general public whom are largely too browbeaten by the greedy taxman and the lying politician, about the true nature of Britain's geopolitical reality. Most people, for instance, will be blissfully unaware that for the past 65-70 years, there have been Russian nuclear weapons pointed in our direction, allocated to different cities. Ours (and more so America's) will of course be pointed right back at theirs. Even if someone is sensible enough to acknowledge that is true, some will of course, for pragmatic and sanity based reasons, prefer not to think about it. But it's true regardless of that. Every single major city in the world probably has someone's nuclear stockpile arsenal pointed at it in some way, shape or form. And of course, that is just how these things are. But it's rarely acknowledged (for obvious reasons, because it's f'ing grim af) so most people won't even realise. Yet I remind myself from time to time, that will be the case. Perhaps that is macabre but it is food for thought. It's also an unavoidable reality of living in the post-Atomic Age world.
@@TheBritishEmpire920 Although I hasten to add, a big part of why the average Joe Bloggs general public member doesn't care about our geopolitical standing or the strategic realities of our predicament, is that they will be fully-consumed by materialism and day to day life. Most people are either too busy, too selfish or too vain to care. And that is how it is sadly in 2023.
@@TheBritishEmpire920 I think they called - was it 2021 - the 'Year of the Royal Navy'. Lots of additional funding. Even so, I think you'll agree it's still just not enough. The extra 5 Billion PM Sunak declared for Defence in the newer budget, is still just going on AUKUS anyway. I mean sure that's great for the submarine service but that is still just initial investment. There'll be £3 Billion on R+D and £2 Billion on buying long lead components or something like that. So that increase got swallowed up by that and overall increases per year, planned to carry on until at least 2027 I think, to take spending to 2.5% GDP, is still heavily cancelled out by inflation rates rising. So in real terms, the actual increase last year for example, wasn't 5 billion, but 1 billion.
The Royal Navy is smaller in size because it decided to focus on two aircraft carriers. To put into perspective, a carrier costs about £3.7 billion, a frigate costs around £250 million. If the 2 carriers weren't made, they could have made 30 or so frigates instead (not that it would make any sense). I'm just highlighting that they decided to go for power over quantity. This is a step in the right direction, as no navy in 2023 can call itself a serious navy without carrier strike groups. But the cut to the escort fleet has definitely been felt. It is due to increase in number in the 2030s (8x t26, 5x t31 and 5x t32 frigates being made), but we need those YESTERDAY...2030s is too far away. I also believe we should at least be doubling the number of OPVs. The UK has overseas territories in the Caribbean, Mediterranean, South Atlantic and Indian Ocean...there should be a permanent OPV presence at each of these territories.
@@alexplummer6397 because they get rather unfortunate things like tropical cyclones, drug smugglers etc and it might be nice for them to have some help. Oh and Britain has security commitments to several islands in the Caribbean who fall under our overseas territories or as members of the commonwealth.
@@Kav. are you aware of the British resentment in the Caribbean? Be honest these islands were all slaves islands ruled by Britain and other colonial powers. Help is very suspicious considering we can’t drill and refine our own resources without giving BP a huge cut. We only like cricket because we can take swings at them lol
Given how they act and the threats they make in the Persian Gulf I'm very surprised that Iran hasn't subjected to Operation Praying Mantis 2. It seems they forgot the lesson of the first one and need a refresher course.
Love how the brits make threats everywhere knowing full well that nobody takes them seriously. Its just that the UK will cry to the USA for help yet again. The brits are like that chihuahua dog that constantly barks at everyone passing by while having that german shepard (USA) standing behind him !!! lolololololol
I probably dont know the whole story a Iranian boat was boarded for being illegal in some way, so 2 questions there, first, was the boarding legal? second, was the boat found to be illegal? If the answers are no and no well surely the Iranians have good cause to take action. People here need to open up the reality box and look inside, the UK is a shadow of its former self on many levels many justifiably so, but we clearly do not have the resources to have grey ships all around the UK let alone the World anymore, we as a Country are getting poorer every day, the NHS is on its knees people are earning a fraction of what they were, and lots of that ultimately goes out of the country, Perhaps we can still wave a flag around the World but the pole is very thin and weak. Its other Peoples time to lead now Great Britain has had its era thats just the reality of it. .
A common fault of Western and European nations is that we arrogantly think that, just because we had strategic military advantage during past conflicts, we forget that this only occurred due to active conflict and the necessity to build in response to the threats of active war. We foolishly repeat the mistake. Russia, North Korea, China, and Iran are enjoying our failure to be proactive.
EU laws are not international laws, therefore illegal. Hypocritical attitude by a nation reacting to the Houthis campaign against the Gaza outrage...by blockading a Iranian ship intending to supply Syria with much needed oil (while Syrian oil was being stolen by the United States and smuggled over the Iraqi border) So much for the "rules- based order.
It is very tempting to say "look how the mighty have fallen" and that type of cliche. But particular people made particular decisions. The government of the day decided to play silly b*ggers with Iran, without taking the Iranians seriously enough to provide more escort cover in the Straits of Hormuz. Ships could have been made available, but weren´t. The Strategic Defence Review under PM Cameron absolutely gutted the Armed Forces in general, and the Navy in particular. Britain is an island, if you need any kind of armed force, you need a navy. I´m not being political. But I do think that powerful people that make particularly stupid decisions should be held accountable.
And what did HMS Montrose get for her efforts, an early retirement! The Royal Navy has retired 2 type 23 frigates to save money so now the RN has 11 frigates and 6 destroyers, I was told that you need 3 warships to have 1 at sea, 1 at sea, 1 in refit and 1 preparing to go to sea to replace the 1 already at sea. We spend more money on defence than Japan yet take a minute to look at what Japan has in it’s armed forces! Something is seriously wrong with the MoD’s use of resources! They wasted 3.4 billion pounds on nimrod and then broke them up and spent another 3.4 billion pounds on P8’s just think what they could have brought with 3.4 billion pounds? MoD not fit for purpose!
Should have just sunk one of the patrol boats with MG and Autocannon fire. If that Helicopter didn’t bug out, than it should have been targeted too. I’m sick and tired of us having to walk around each and every mine. Bulldoze through the minefield with an Engineering vehicle.
I cannot begin to imagine how fkn angry I'd be to be a merchant seaman at my post in the bowls of some behemoth; to be confronted by a fully armed Commando boarding party
@@EverythingTitanic class yourself what you like, but you are ENGLISH and NOT British, don't let the British take away your identity 👍🏴🏴🏴
Tragic to see what the country and it’s Navy have been reduced to now day’s. Royal Navy doesn’t even protect our borders from small boats so what hopes it got against Iran.
My god i hope the British gov wake up and pump more money into the navy , China are investing more and more every year into their naval fleet and other western countries are cutting back it wont end well . Thank you to the brave men and women of the british navy for keeping international waters safe prayers from Ireland
So instead of transfering oil that take 1-2 week accros the land. They will take the sea route that takes month all around the world? And nobody think that is shady asf?
Its terrible that we are wasting so much money in the UK dealing with what ever washes up on our shores, rather than spending on defense to make sure Pariah sates are kept in check
Think that rope gets closer and closer to the deck with each dispatch there? That first bloke had a pretty ‘warm’ descent at that height! Bet his forearms were almost as hot as his gloves at the bottom of the rope 😂
So, I hope everybody in the west realizes why you should never give a free pass to this regime! And why it is important for NATO countries to invest in navy capabilities.
or maybe, just maybe, NATO countries should keep their warships where they belong? you know, in their OWN TERRITORIAL WATERS? and stop trying to be the world's police?
Thats ridiculous we should have forcefully retrieved our ship regardless of cost, allowing Iran to believe it has again won makes us look like a target. We should have threatened them with a complete military strike. Place assets into the area even if it took us a year to do so then sink every last vessel they own and bombard their air force. Send in the S.Fs retake the ship and its crew. This would have been incredibly risky and expensive but thats the Iranians would never mess with the UK again.
So can someone tell me how these two differ? The british claim "innocent passage" yet the iranian tanker conducting innocent passage can be stopped? What is this hypocrisy?
You can ask Iran. That nation is notorious for seizing other international Tanker Ships. Iran was unopposed in the Persian Gulf and Straight of Hormuz before the U.S. led Operation Praying Mantis. Until today, Iran never changes.
