UK's new £1,000,000,000 cyber command that aims to defeat Putin's hackers
Britain will flush more than £1 billion on artificial intelligence and a cyber team in response to major Russian attacks authorised by Vladimir Putin.
From tech and logistics to airports and air traffic control, the UK has been in the firing line since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine and more than 90,000 hacks have been detected in the last two years.
Attacks have been on the rise and so has their level of sophistication.
This is why John Healey declared that the armed forces must be given the upper hand in the growing online battlefield.
Speaking on Wednesday from MoD Corsham, the UK's military cyber HQ, the defence secretary confirmed that the Kremlin has 'stepped up' attacks.
He said: 'Certainly the intensity of the cyber attacks that we're seeing from Russia stepped up, and cyber is now the leading edge, not just of defence, but of contests and tension between countries.'
He said there is a 'level of cyber warfare that is continual and intensifying' that requires the UK to step up its capacity to defend against it.
Healey announced that a new Cyber and Electromagnetic Command will lead this 'digital fightback'.
It will also oversee the £1 billion investment in upgraded targeting systems known as 'kill web'.
The government has remained tightlipped about it. What we know is that it will operate by using AI and new software.
In a new era of threat we're investing in pioneering technology to combat daily cyber attacks.As part of the Strategic Defence Review @JohnHealey_MP has launched a £1 billion Digital Targeting Web and CyberEM Command to coordinate the UK's defensive and offensive capabilities. pic.twitter.com/eG8ep5qerK — Ministry of Defence 🇬🇧 (@DefenceHQ) May 29, 2025
It will connect military weapons systems across all three forces, enabling quicker decisions to be made on the battlefield. More Trending
For example, it could identify a threat using a sensor on a ship or in space and then disable it using an F-35 aircraft, drone, or offensive cyber operation, the ministry of defence said.
Healey added: 'Ways of warfare are rapidly changing, with the UK facing daily cyber-attacks on this new frontline.
'The hard-fought lessons from Putin's illegal war in Ukraine leave us under no illusions that future conflicts will be won through forces that are better connected, better equipped and innovating faster than their adversaries.
'We will give our armed forces the ability to act at speeds never seen before – connecting ships, aircraft, tanks and operators so they can share vital information instantly and strike further and faster.'
Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.
For more stories like this, check our news page.
MORE: Leader who killed 6,000,000 of his own honoured in new statue
MORE: The bizarre reason Russia wants to ban Shrek and other beloved animations
MORE: Putin threats to 'throttle' US firms like Microsoft and Zoom in words war with Trump
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
Will Trump pardon Diddy? Trial could end, experts say
According to Kalt, Trump -- who appears to be in the middle of a pardoning spree -- would be within his presidential rights to extend a preemptive pardon to fellow New Yorker Combs, who has been described by witnesses so far as violent and abusive. "These are federal charges (against Combs), so that's the main limit. The matter has be federal, it has to be criminal vs. civil, and related to something that's already been done," says Kalt. "But the person doesn't have to even be charged yet, or convicted. The Supreme Court has said preemptive pardons are OK." Typically, one of the last gestures from an outgoing president is a pardon. In President Joe Biden's final days in office, he famously pardoned his son, Hunter, convicted of federal gun felonies and federal tax charges. At the end of Trump's first term, he granted clemency to political allies such as Roger Stone, found guilty of obstructing a congressional investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election and related offenses. But pardons can take place during a president's term, says Kalt. The right was established in Article II, Section 2, Clause 1 of the Constitution, which among other things gives the president "power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offenses against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment." Kalt says the power to pardon is derived from the British monarch's historic right and stems from a recognition that criminal law was often too harsh, and it was important to have a safety valve. "The president was the best person to be that safety valve because of his political accountability," he says. But that's where things get murky, he adds, noting that Republican lawmakers "don't appear willing to hold the president accountable" for granting pardons, meaning they aren't costing him in terms of political capital. In contrast, President Gerald Ford's controversial pardoning of disgraced President Richard Nixon was perceived so negatively "that it probably cost Ford re-election in 1976," Kalt says. In just over 100 days since taking office, Trump has issued pardons to a broad range of personalities. They include Todd and Julie Chrisley, stars of the reality show "Chrisley Knows Best," who were convicted in 2022 of swindling $36 million from Atlanta banks and being tax evaders, and rapper NBA YoungBoy, who in 2024 was sentenced to two years in prison for weapons possession. He also pardoned former Illinois governor Rod Blagojevich, convicted of wire fraud and extortion, and Jan. 6 participant and "Bob's Burgers" actor Jay Johnston. The reason many presidents issue pardons at the end of their terms is precisely to avoid political fallout, says Kalt. In that sense, Trump's brash approach suggests he has no concerns about such ramifications. "I don't agree with these pardons on their merits, but the fact that he did them when he is politically accountable as opposed to slinking out the door does add some legitimacy to them in that sense," he says. "With pardons, you don't need Congress, you wave your magic wand and it happens. You can see the appeal for a president, particularly one like Trump." One can also see the appeal for those such as Combs, whose ordeal could end instantly should Trump's pardon "wand" wave his way.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
Warfare is changing by the day, but Britain is still decades behind
When Lord George Robertson led the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) in 1997, the GDP of the UK was greater than those of China and India combined. America reigned supreme, the only other superpower, the Soviet Union, having slowly dissolved after losing the Cold War eight years previously. Lord George is back as one of three leads of the latest SDR, widely expected to be published on Monday. But the geostrategic landscape is very different now. No longer can we afford to luxuriate in that uni-polar moment of Western and Nato supremacy. China, Iran and North Korea are functioning surprisingly well as a de facto alliance in supporting Russia in its war on Ukraine. And that is a real war of national survival, not the politically caveated, limited military interventions of the global war on terrorism. This is war at speed and scale, a war mixing the timeless requirements of industrial production with the cutting-edge technologies of the digital age: smart sensors, big-data, cloud connectivity, artificial intelligence, robotics. The new ways of warfare are evolving at dizzying speed. Technical evolution, the obsolescence cycle, is now measured in weeks. Dual-use technology – that with civil and military utility – is blended with more conventional munitions; decades-old assumptions are upended overnight; the ways and means of warfare are being comprehensively disrupted. Historically, this is a change that happens every century or so: Napoleon's Levée en Masse, sail to steam, the aeroplane. That a superpower's navy has, in the Black Sea, been defeated by a country without a navy is a wake up call to all. And here lies the big risk – the victor's paradox. 'Top Dogs' are loath to shed that which put them on top, that in which they have made big investments and of which they are masters. Paradigm shifts are the opportunity for smart challengers to abandon the previous, flagging chase and master the emerging world quicker than the current champions can adapt. China, especially, has had a plan to do exactly this for the last few decades, with massive investments in, inter alia, cyber, AI and hypersonic missiles to add a technological edge to the military mass it has built in parallel: its navy now has more ships than America's. It is using Ukraine, and Kashmir, as a proving ground. Russia has learned (slowly, as it is a corrupt kleptocracy) with grim determination the lessons of modern warfare – exemplified by its recent invention of fibre-optically steered drones. It also knows how to mobilise a war economy. In contrast, and despite much pumped-up rhetoric, most of Nato, including the UK, has demonstrated a reluctance to abandon the old paradigm. Yes, we have bought some drones, but we have bought them as if we were buying sophisticated manned warplanes. We may be buying them slightly quicker now, but these are percentage changes on a system that still takes years, and millions of pounds, to buy tens. Ukraine is on schedule to make four million drones this year. Allied to that is that Western militaries have mirrored a society that has become ever more regulated and risk averse. The British Army is down to 14 artillery pieces, which were bought as stop-gaps. There is still no certification and so no clearance to fire them on a UK range. Similar restrictions apply to innovative drone training – but what if one crashes? The paradox here is that by trying to eradicate every small risk we make the big one – war – more likely. Ultimately we aim to deter, and deterrence depends on credibility. Credibility hinges on the proven military capability to win and the political will to engage with force and see it through. Small forces, a limited production capacity and supply chain to rapidly expand and evolve them, and a risk averse culture that trains and employs them will not impress allies or deter enemies. The SDR's other authors alongside Lord George are Fiona Hill, a proven free-thinker, and General Richard Barrons who was one of the first to write about this changing paradigm ten years ago. Their SDR should not be read as recent reviews have been – a relative tally of platform numbers and the size of the residual, 'bonsai' military. That paradigm was already broken several defence reviews ago – tweaking it is but to fiddle with the increasingly irrelevant. The reader should ask instead: to what extent is this a root and branch reform of our now sclerotic system, and to what extent is it going to re-orientate our whole Defence Enterprise – MOD Head Office processes and accountabilities, agile adaptation and procurement, secure supply chains, rapid adoption of technological advances, expansion of reserve forces? If it charts a clear path to a revised 'theory of winning' that can credibly generate a wartime force with the mass and lethality to defeat our foes then it will be a good review. If it continues the usual horse-trading between the individual services over their peacetime structure then it will have been a missed opportunity. With the US making it clear that Europe must look after its own defence we have no safety net if we get it wrong. But America's position gives us an opportunity as well: the chance, the obligation, to show genuine leadership in Europe.
Scotsman
3 hours ago
- Scotsman
Strategic Defence Review: SNP MP urges UK to ‘rethink priorities' and look to Europe
Sign up to our Politics newsletter Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... An SNP MP has claimed the UK must 'rethink its defence priorities', as Sir Keir Starmer prepares to publish the critical Strategic Defence Review. The party's Europe spokesman Stephen Gethins urged UK ministers to seek closer ties with Europe, insisting a defence strategy was more than just 'hardware'. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Speaking exclusively to The Scotsman, Mr Gethins pointed to the Nordic approach to the threat from Russia as an example for the UK to follow. He said: 'I think the UK needs to rethink its defence priorities. I am not sure everybody gets just how significant the challenge is for Europe and for democracies at the moment with the withdrawal of the United States, and the US being a less reliable security partner. HMS Queen Elizabeth leaving Rosyth in Fife, Scotland, and sailing under the Forth bridge. 'It challenges a lot of the assumptions that have been made in the MoD [Ministry of Defence] for a few years, assumptions they should have been challenging themselves. 'We are years into the war in Ukraine. We are now in the second Trump presidency, the challenges we are facing should not have come as a surprise to anybody.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The strategic defence review is an overarching examination of the UK's defence capability and will be published on Monday. SNP MP Stephen Gethins Sir Keir Starmer had previously said he would set a date for when spending 2.5 per cent of Britain's GDP on defence had to be achieved after the defence review had been completed. Mr Gethins, the MP for Arbroath and Broughty Ferry, claimed the key areas to be looking at were closer collaboration with other countries in Europe. He said: 'The Nordics for example, they have much closer collaboration and are taking the threat from Russia more seriously. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'There are some really good illustrations there. It's also about thinking more about defence not simply as military hardware, but also in terms of energy security, food and drink security, and disinformation. We need a much more well rounded approach to security'. The UK government has already confirmed a new 'Cyber and Electromagnetic Command' to address cyber security. Ministers will also invest more than £1 billion into a new 'digital targeting web' to be set up by 2027 to better connect weapons systems and allow battlefield decisions targeting enemy threats to be made and executed faster. Mr Gethins praised the approach to cyber security, but said failing to work with Europe was undermining the goal. He said: 'I think cyber is an area they are increasingly taking seriously, but it is an area where Brexit damages our security. If you look at most other countries, they see membership of the EU and Nato as being the twin pillars of their security. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad 'Europe is a way to invest heavily in its arms infrastructure, and actually that is another reason why the UK needs to be closer to its European partners. It makes sense for the UK, or an independent Scotland, to be more integrated in that European defence structure. 'Labour are still wedded to Tory policies and assumptions around a relationship with the rest of Europe and that has to end.' It comes as the UK government announced an upgrade for Scottish military homes, with 3,000 to be improved as part of an overall £7 billion funding during this Parliament. The review will cover all aspects of defence, including the UK's international partnerships and alliances, and how these can be strengthened.
