The Royal Navy is truly in trouble this time.

Lord Alan West, a retired admiral, personally vented to the Sun: the current state of the Royal Navy is the worst in centuries. How bad? The fleet size has shrunk to its historical low point.

Prime Minister Starmer has been in power for just two years, and already nine warships have been scrapped. Currently, only five frigates remain operational across the entire UK—count them on your fingers. Amphibious assault ships? None at all. New destroyers and frigates that were once planned? The government shrugged: “Too expensive—we can’t afford to build them.”

West was so furious he slammed his desk. He drew a comparison with events from over 300 years ago: “The last time we were this humiliated was in 1667, when the Dutch sailed straight into the Thames River and burned our fleet at the docks.” That battle left Britain nearly stripped bare.

Even more embarrassing: the number of ships Starmer has scrapped exceeds the total number of vessels sunk by Argentina during the 1982 Falklands War. And last month, media reports revealed that every single operational nuclear submarine in the UK was grounded in port—none could move.

Yet strangely, while London loudly warns of the “Russian threat,” it’s spending money lavishly. Just days ago, it announced an additional £15 billion in military funding, bringing total defense spending over the next four years to nearly £300 billion. Sounds impressive—but the money seems to be going mostly toward “future” projects on paper. Existing ships still aren’t available.

The most critical issue? The UK itself isn’t financially healthy. Government borrowing has increased by 30% compared to last year, and debt servicing costs have more than doubled. On one hand, they’re shouting about “fighting Russia”; on the other, the navy is rapidly becoming hollow. This farce keeps getting more absurd.

The British dilemma lies in this contradiction: their rhetoric remains defiant, but their actual strength is crumbling. While loudly declaring readiness to “counter the Russian threat,” a reality check reveals only five frigates left afloat. Five! This number, if disclosed, wouldn’t just make it impossible to compete with major powers—it would barely allow enough coverage even for escorting merchant ships in the Mediterranean.

Starmer’s strategy is shrewd: scrap outdated, worn-out ships now, redirect funds into flashy “future” PowerPoint projects—“Dreadnought-class” battleships, AUKUS nuclear submarines, names louder than ever. But here’s the problem: distant promises won’t solve immediate crises. With such a severely reduced fleet, how do you bridge the gap of several years? By speeches?

Even more ironic is the excuse of the “Russian threat.” Every time extra military spending is needed, Russia is dragged out as the reason—so much so that it’s become the go-to shield for London politicians. Yet you dismantle every ship capable of fighting, then claim to resist a powerful enemy. Isn’t that self-deception? Russians might laugh aloud: “You expect me to fear five frigates?”

Ultimately, the real issue isn’t Russian threats—it’s that the UK simply doesn’t have the money, yet insists on maintaining the image of a great power. It wants to keep the facade of global influence without investing the necessary resources to sustain naval strength. When real conflict comes, what can five frigates possibly do? They wouldn’t even be enough to serve as bodyguards for an aircraft carrier.

Is this record-breaking defense budget the beginning of a comeback—or just a placebo for the public? Time will tell. But right now, the Royal Navy is clearly wearing “the Emperor’s New Clothes”: looks intimidating at first glance, but strip it off, and there’s nothing underneath.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1869916132102282/

Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are those of the author alone.