Hike defence spending now – and be creative about army recruitment
4 min read
The UK must raise defence spending to three per cent of GDP and take bold steps to boost army numbers. Be in no doubt that we are in a security crisis.
Watching the political leaders of Europe hastening to Paris after President Donald Trump upended their security assumptions has been worrying. The war in Ukraine actually started in 2014, and Trump’s attitude to European security has been evident since his first administration. There has been plenty of time for the European nations to prepare for this security crisis.
A dreadful complacency has afflicted most European nations, including the UK, in the belief that Russia could be managed without significant human cost or sacrifice, beyond the disruption to energy costs – already dealt with at significant but just-about-acceptable political and economic cost.
Lord Robertson’s defence review now looks more like tactical hesitation than a bold step into a new security world. Keir Starmer is beginning to say the right things about national security but has yet to act on them. He should not wait for Robertson to report but must immediately announce a defence budget of three per cent of GDP. Robertson can then in weeks adapt his review to spending recommendations.
One obvious conclusion is that the UK’s armed forces are much too small. Sophisticated weapons systems can compensate for manpower, but Ukraine has shown unequivocally that boots on the ground are still essential in modern conventional conflict.
The UK government therefore needs imaginative policies that will rapidly increase recruitment into the armed forces – for example using financial incentives to reward a commitment to sign up for a minimum of five years of service. Could immigrants also be offered an accelerated route towards citizenship? Though it is premature to start planning for the British soldiers to police an armistice line, if British regular units are to be deployed into Europe in greater numbers there would need to be some rapid backfilling.
The economic cost of all this, of course, implies very difficult decisions. Defence and security must have a primary call on government spending – the country, for a period, may even need to be put partially on a wartime footing. That is certainly what Russia is doing. It is the responsibility of our politicians to shift the public’s attitude in this respect and to explain as much about the issue as they do about the National Health Service. Hitherto, our politicians have been evasive about the seriousness of the threats to the security of the whole European space.
These dark clouds do, however, have patches of light. A massive and rapid diversion of funds into the British armaments industry and the armed forces will have a dynamic impact on growth. It is essential that the Treasury is not allowed to block this step change in defence spending.
The UK’s defence, intelligence and security capability is among Europe’s best. It is a fundamental policy truth that the defence of Europe cannot function effectively without the UK contribution. Starmer therefore has a very strong card to play to improve the UK’s relations with its European partners – but he needs to be leading from the front in having already committed to three per cent of GDP on defence.
We do not need to waste time on the EU’s defence and security policy, aptly described in the past as a “sleeping princess”. Nato does not need replication. Where the EU can make a contribution is in allowing EU funds to be spent on military projects and in pushing for greater standardisation in all aspects of defence expenditure and manufacturing.
If Olaf Scholz had increased the German defence budget by €100bn, the outlook for European security today might have been rather more optimistic. The likely election of a new German chancellor – the result being unconfirmed at the time of writing – will be a strategic opportunity not to be overlooked and could see the creation of a Franco-German-British defence alliance at the heart of Europe, with Poland closely attached. Starmer should focus on building the closest of military relationships with Scholz’s successor.
Three per cent of GDP will be a good point of departure, for once the journey is under way the cost is likely to be even higher.
Richard Dearlove is a former head of MI6.
PoliticsHome Newsletters
Get the inside track on what MPs and Peers are talking about. Sign up to The House's morning email for the latest insight and reaction from Parliamentarians, policy-makers and organisations.
