UK Defence Spending: Fix the Basics First

British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer’s recent announcement that the UK’s annual defence budget will increase from approximately 2.3% up to 2.5% beginning in April 2027 – three years earlier than initially planned – and thereafter up to 3% “in the next Parliament” is a step in the right direction.

It is, however, still woefully underwhelming and woefully late. Military commentators like me have been banging on for years now saying that Britain’s defence budget needed to be boosted significantly, both to fill the holes in current programmes and also to face the new potential risks and threats that the UK now seems likely to face.

The catalyst for this seemingly new enthusiasm for spending on defence from Starmer’s government has undoubtedly been the return of Donald Trump to the White House for his second term as President of the USA. During his first term, before Joe Biden’s tenure in office, Trump had repeatedly stated that Europe needed to bear more of the burden of European defence, even at one point threatening to withdraw the USA from NATO altogether if the other allies didn’t step up to the plate.

It should come as a surprise to no-one, therefore, that he has returned to this theme with a vengeance in the early days of his second term. And yet now France, the UK, Germany, and others are scrambling to show willing and up their spending on their armed forces lest Trump follows through with his threat. Without the USA NATO would become a much weaker organisation at a stroke.

The UK government has been struggling to explain exactly how much this additional funding actually is, a topic covered in a previous blog. Suffice to say there are some contradictions in the announcements which need to be cleared up.

There is also a difference between Ministry of Defence (MoD) spending (as reported to Parliament) and Military Spending (as reported to NATO). The figures for NATO are higher, since they include a number of additional elements such as military pensions and British contributions to UN peacekeeping – in compliance with NATO reporting standards.

So it’s all as clear as mud at the moment of writing. I shall endeavour to clarify further in a future blog post, but don’t hold your breath.

What has been mildly amusing is the outpouring on what we might call “fantasy fleet” projections from military enthusiasts of all experience and none. We must buy more F-35B Lightning II fighter jets for the RAF/RN, apparently, and more frigates and destroyers for the RN to protect our carriers. And don’t forget more artillery, tanks, air-defence systems, and drones for the army.

Most of those aspirations are likely to fall on deaf ears. The money announced will barely be sufficient to bolster already existing  programmes which the MoD is struggling to deliver thanks to years of  cost-cutting.

What I and many others think is that any extra expenditure needs to be spent on the basics which have been ignored for so long. Personnel is the big one; all three armed services are struggling for recruits and have been for some time, leaving the RN with vessels without crews, the RAF with aircraft with no pilots, and the army with, well, too few soldiers to do anything much at all.

Recruiting targets have been missed for years, and more trained personnel leave every year than new individuals join. And it’s not really a pay problem, it’s just that the armed forces, with tales of obsolete equipment, poor housing, and limited opportunities for interesting employment and advancement, are regarded as organisations in decline, and what young, enthusiastic lad or lass wants to be part of that when other more exciting options beckon?

Then we have to look at resilience. Half our ammunition stocks have gone to Ukraine and await replenishment. Our defence industry has been on the back foot for as long as I can remember, and Britain has even lost the means to manufacture many of the things we relied on domestic industry for in the past.

That’s where the money needs to go in my opinion. As I have said repeatedly until I’m blue in the face, all the shiny new equipment in the world is not worth a jot if we don’t have the personnel to crew it and the defence industrial base to sustain it if push comes to shove.

Those areas are where the problems lie, and I don’t think either Starmer or Defence Secretary John Healy, good bloke though he seems to be, have grasped the facts yet. Time is not on Britain’s side.

Lt Col Stuart Crawford is a defence analyst and former army officer. Sign up for his podcasts and newsletters at www.DefenceReview.uk

Lt Col Stuart Crawford’s latest book Tank Commander (Hardback) is available now

• http://www.DefenceReview.UK
• @peoplemattertv
• @509298