The discussion distinguishes British dependence from proxy control

Is the United Kingdom effectively a United States proxy rather than an independent defence actor?

The argument here rejects the proxy label and describes dependence as self-created through British choices about investment and force structure.

At this watch point, the proxy label is rejected in favour of an interpretation centred on British underinvestment and disorganisation. Forces deliberately designed around American regional operations are offered as a comparison, because their integration can be clearer and more coherent. The argument is that Britain's reliance on allied capability does not itself establish direct American control. Dependence is described as self-created through British choices about force structure and investment.