America warns Britain is betraying its soldiers

US special forces leaders now doubt Britain’s reliability. Veterans of Northern Ireland, Afghanistan and Syria face legal peril while the state undermines the country’s own defence.

There are moments when a single piece of reporting cuts through the noise and exposes something deeper. A recent Spectator article by Richard Williams (who commanded 22 SAS from 2005 to 2008) and Sir David Davis (an experienced parliamentarian and SAS reservist) is one such moment.

After a recent visit to Washington, meeting politicians on both sides of the political divide, and military and intelligence services people, their central claim is stark: American political, military, and intelligence figures increasingly believe that Britain has betrayed its own special forces—and, in doing so, weakened the alliance itself. That is not media blather. It is a strategic warning.

Lawfare and operational risk

From Northern Ireland to Syria and Afghanistan, UK Special Forces have operated at the very sharp end of protecting the nation. Since 2001, US-UK integration has brought cutting-edge technology and tactics to chronically underfunded British units. That partnership is now fraying.

Decades-old counter-terrorist operations — where hesitation would have meant death — are being reopened under the Northern Ireland Troubles Bill and misapplied human rights legislation. Veterans are forced to defend split-second decisions taken under fire.

• SAS squadrons are understrength

• Experienced warrant officers are leaving in droves

• Recruitment for gruelling selection courses is collapsing

The practical outcome is immediate: the UK cannot provide the manpower or reliability that American counterparts expect. Some US operators are reportedly considering whether it might be safer to operate without UK forces, rather than risk hesitation due to legal exposure.

Propagandising the past

Their article revisits infamous incidents, such as Loughgall (1987), Coagh (1991), and Clonoe (1992). These were live-fire engagements designed to prevent lethal attacks. Veterans who acted decisively are now subjected to lawfare, decades after the fact.

Patrick Kelly’s squad at Loughgall confronted an IRA unit responsible for hundreds of killings. A fresh inquest, promised by Hilary Benn, does not seek to examine tactics or intent — it serves as a propaganda victory for those who opposed the state.

The article points out: “Kelly’s family peddles the narrative that they ‘went to blow up, not to kill’, an extraordinary claim given that they used a 400-pound bomb to destroy the police station, with the police officers inside. A scout involved in the attack confirmed: ‘The point of the [IRA] operation was to get in before they [the RUC officers] left, to take them out.’”

Strategic consequences

The consequences extend beyond individual veterans:

• UK Special Forces are weaker than ever

• The US may limit or withdraw operational cooperation

• Intelligence sharing and joint mission trust is eroding

• Britain risks becoming a second-tier partner in counter-terrorist operations

Veterans are at the sharp end of the state’s failure. Legal attacks, stress-induced illness, and reputational damage accumulate while national security itself is undermined.

A moral and operational crisis

Washington’s concern is practical: hesitation or legal entanglement could compromise operations. Britain’s enemies never forced the SAS to hesitate. Its own government is achieving what no terrorist could: turning the nation’s finest into political targets and operational risks.

This is not abstract politics. It is a strategic misstep with real-world consequences: lost trust, lost capability, and lost credibility with allies.

If Britain continues down this path, the very men who keep the nation safe will be sidelined by fear of legal repercussions, leaving the country more exposed than ever.

Veterans are not just history.

They are the present.

And a harbinger of many brave soldiers’ futures.