Defence staff chief sets out vision for the UK's armed forces General Sir David Richards said the military must adapt if it is to continue to provide the security that the government expects. Photograph: David Rose /Rex Features Britain's most senior military officer has set out his vision for the future of the armed forces and argued the UK must have more formal alliances with countries in the Middle East and Africa to counter threats that are more serious now than they were when defence cuts started to bite two years ago. General Sir David Richards, chief of the defence staff, said he was developing a doctrine that reflected the fact the military has less money than it would wish, and must adapt if it is to continue to provide the country with the security that the government expects. The armed forces had to be prepared to be ruthless about what equipment it really needed, and slay "sacred cows" - which could mean further difficult choices for the army, RAF and the navy. "Much of the world seems less stable and more dangerous than was the case even two years ago," he said. The world, he said, is now a place where "governance vacuums present opportunities for extremist groups to perpetrate large-scale violence and disruption, especially ... cyber-instruments and bio-terror weaponry become inevitably more accessible." "We have to be hard-nosed realists, accepting we have less than we would wish but that we are still required to protect this nation's interests through the projection of military force," he said in a speech at the Royal United Services Institute. We cannot shrug our shoulders and hope the problem will go away. We have to be ready to fight and fight effectively, often not on our own terms and accepting the constraints we are under. We should be under no illusions. The armed forces of tomorrow, like those of today, will be engaged in operations around the world. Richards said he envisaged the army bonding further with militaries in the Gulf and in Jordan. Two or more of the army's seven "adaptable" brigades could form "close tactical-level relationships" in the region. This would greatly enhance our ability to support allies as they contain and deter threats and, with our naval presence in Bahrain, air elements in the United Arab Emirates and Qatar, and traditional but potentially enhanced roles in Oman, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, would make us a regional ally across the spectrum. The same could happen in Africa, where the army already undertakes regular training in countries such as Kenya, South Africa and Botswana. "This will require tough decisions," he said. If we are to invest properly in some relationships, others will naturally get less attention. But if we get this right, and we will, we will have deeper links to specific regional partners giving them the confidence to deal with their own problems and, when appropriate, to act in partnership with us. Richards said he would resist the navy losing more ships, but said the service needed to rethink what it could do. The navy might have more ships in the future, but suggested the service would need vessels tailored to "routine non war-fighting duties." The RAF, too, had to face up to a future that must include remote-controlled 'drones', he said Remotely piloted air systems and novel anti-air defences have changed our understanding of both what it means to fight and defend. We must not allow sacred cows, such as the indispensability of on-board pilots, to rule the day. "Without doubt, actions in cyberspace will form part of any future conflict," he added. We have seen nations, their proxies and non-state actors use this new space for terrorism and conflict. With David Cameron due this week to decide how many British troops will come home from Afghanistan next year, Richards warned that Nato could not look like it was "cutting and running," and said the "time is ripe" for diplomats to find "that elusive political solution 10 years of military effort and sacrifice has sought to create the conditions for." Though Richards has privately cautioned Downing Street about being too gung-ho about the current crisis in Syria, he warned Bashal al-Assad Assad that he would cross a line if he threatened to use chemical weapons. The world is not a safe place. Some threats to our interests and allies are long term but some are very present. The immediate danger of the collapse of the Syrian regime is one. We will support our allies in the region and would all like to see a diplomatic solution but cannot afford to remove options from the table at this stage. Should chemical weapons be used or proliferate, both President Obama and Prime Minister Cameron have made it clear that a line would have been crossed. And Syria is linked to Iran. The regime is backed by Tehran so the fall of Assad's dictatorship will impact the Iranian government. What that means for the stability of the region is as yet unclear. Richards concluded: "The world is not a safer place and the distinction between home and abroad is strategically obsolete. Today it is part of a continuum. We cannot just stand by and hope we are ignored and danger passes us by.