
‘New era of threat' amid changing face of war, UK defence review to warn
Britain is facing 'a new era of threat' with drones, artificial intelligence and other technologies changing the nature of warfare more fundamentally than at any other point in history, the government's strategic defence review is expected to conclude on Monday.
The 130-page document written by three advisers to the prime minister, Keir Starmer, will warn of the 'immediate and pressing' danger posed by Russia and is expected to try to draw heavily on lessons learned from the war in Ukraine.
But it will also focus on China, not described as an enemy but as a 'sophisticated and persistent challenge', which at times has been willing to cooperate with Moscow, and two smaller 'regional disruptors' – Iran and North Korea.
It will paint a picture of the most heightened military and security threat since the end of the cold war, though it falls short of saying that the intensity of Moscow's cyber and sabotage activities means the UK has already drifted into a war with Russia.
The analysis, put together by a team headed by the former Nato secretary general George Robertson, is not expected to set out fresh commitments for defence spending. Instead, it will reiterate a commitment made by Starmer in February to increase the defence budget to 2.5% of GDP by 2027 and to 3% in the next parliament.
But it is likely to be used to help justify a significant expansion in medium-term defence spending that is expected to be agreed at the Nato summit later in June that could amount to more than £50bn in real terms.
Members of the western alliance are discussing a proposal to increase core defence spending to 3.5% of GDP by 2032, with a further 1.5% for cyber and infrastructure initiatives, in response to pressure from Donald Trump.
This week Mark Rutte, Nato's secretary general, said he expected the June summit in The Hague would see allies agree on 'a high defence spend target' of 5% in total, including a figure 'considerably north of 3%' on pure defence spending.
The review is also expected to refer to the question of the size of the British army, amid reports that the Ministry of Defence and Treasury have been battling over whether to include a commitment to increase numbers from the target of 73,000.
Figures out this week show that the size of the army has dropped below the target to the lowest level since the Napoleonic era and earlier, with the number of full-time trained soldiers at 70,860 on 1 April, down 2.3% over the preceding year.
A military source said the defence secretary, John Healey, a persistent critic of falling army size in opposition, had won a commitment to increase the army by a few thousand, but the Ministry of Defence said it did not recognise the speculation.
A commitment to increase army numbers by 5,000, if the recruitment can be achieved, would cost about £2.5bn a year in extra pay, accommodation, kit and other resources. But if successful, it would help the military be able to meet what are likely to be growing overseas commitments in the years ahead.
Britain and France have agreed to lead a multinational 'reassurance force' of up to 30,000 to help keep the peace in Ukraine and keep its air and seaports open if Russia signs up to a durable ceasefire, though so far Vladimir Putin has been unwilling to do so, despite pleas from Trump to stop the war.
Sign up to First Edition
Our morning email breaks down the key stories of the day, telling you what's happening and why it matters
after newsletter promotion
Peter Ricketts, a former national security adviser, said that while it would make sense for the MoD to spend more on drones, cyber capabilities and artificial intelligence, 'another lesson of Ukraine is that mass counts, in terms of manpower and equipment' – and that resourcing of 3.5% of GDP would ultimately be necessary.
An extra £1.5bn is to be allocated by the MoD for improving military accommodation, including urgent upgrades for the 1,000 worst homes, while there will be plans to create a volunteer home guard to protect airports and other sensitive sites from drone or other unexpected attacks by hostile states and terrorists.
The other members of the review panel were the retired general Sir Richard Barrons and Fiona Hill, a former Russia adviser to Donald Trump, who has previously said that 'structurally' world war three has already begun because the international norms of behaviour have been eroded by Russia in Ukraine and by fighting in the Middle East.
Lord Robertson, the chair of the panel, previously described Russia, China, North Korea and Iran as a 'deadly quartet' who were increasingly working together. Iran has emerged as a supplier of drones to Russia while China provides components for weapons – and North Korea has sent troops to fight against Ukraine.
Starmer is expected to unveil the outline review at an event on Monday before Healey lays the full document before parliament.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


North Wales Chronicle
31 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Nato set to approve new military purchases as part of a defence spending hike
The 'capability targets' lay out goals for each of the 32 nations to purchase priority equipment such as air defence systems, long-range missiles, artillery, ammunition, drones and 'strategic enablers' such as air-to-air refuelling, heavy air transport and logistics. Each nation's plan is classified, so details are scarce. 'Today we decide on the capability targets. From there, we will assess the gaps we have, not only to be able to defend ourselves today, but also three, five, seven years from now,' Nato Secretary-General Mark Rutte said. 'All these investments have to be financed,' he told reporters before chairing the meeting at Nato's Brussels headquarters. US President Donald Trump and his Nato counterparts will meet on June 24-25 to agree to new defence investment goals. US defence secretary Pete Hegseth said that 'to be an alliance, you've got to be more than flags. You got to be more than conferences. You need to keep combat ready capabilities'. Spurred on by their own security concerns, European allies and Canada have already been ramping up military spending, including arms and ammunition purchases, since Russia launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022. At the same time, some allies balk at US demands to invest 5% of their gross domestic product in defence – 3.5% on core military spending and 1.5% on the roads, bridges, airfields and sea ports needed to deploy armies more quickly – when they have already struggled to grow their budgets to 2% of GDP. The new targets are assigned by Nato based on a blueprint agreed upon in 2023 – the military organisation's biggest planning shake-up since the Cold War — to defend its territory from an attack by Russia or another major adversary. Under those plans, Nato would aim to have up to 300,000 troops ready to move to its eastern flank within 30 days, although experts suggest the allies would struggle to muster those kinds of numbers. The member countries are assigned roles in defending Nato territory across three major zones – the high north and Atlantic area, a zone north of the Alps, and another in southern Europe. Nato planners believe that the targets must be met within five to 10 years, given the speed at which Russia is building its armed forces now, and which would accelerate were any peace agreement reached to end its war on Ukraine. Some fear Russia might be ready to strike at a Nato country even sooner, especially if Western sanctions are eased and Europe has not prepared. 'Are we going to gather here again and say 'OK, we failed a bit', and then maybe we start learning Russian?' Lithuanian Defence Minister Dovile Sakaliene said. Swedish Defence Minister Pal Jonson also warned that while Russia is bogged down in Ukraine right now, things could quickly change. 'We also know after an armistice or a peace agreement, of course, Russia is going to allocate more forces closer to our vicinity. Therefore, it's extremely important that the alliance use these couple of years now when Russia is still limited by its force posture in and around Ukraine,' Mr Jonson said. If the targets are respected, the member countries will need to spend at least 3% of GDP on defence. Dutch Defense Minister Ruben Brekelmans said his country calculates in the medium term that 'we should spend 3.5% at least on defence, which in the Netherlands means an additional 16 to 19 billion euro (£13-16 billion) addition to our current budget.' The Netherlands is likely to buy more tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and long-range missile systems, including US-made Patriots that can target aircraft, cruise missiles and shorter-range ballistic missiles.


Reuters
32 minutes ago
- Reuters
UK new car sales recover in May as EV discounts attract buyers, SMMT data shows
June 5 (Reuters) - Britain's new car sales rose from a year earlier in May, marking the second month of recovery in 2025, amid heavy discounting by electric vehicle makers, a report by the Society of Motor Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) showed on Thursday. Chinese EVs have been rapidly expanding in the European markets by offering deep discounts and forcing other automakers in an intense price war that has strained their profit margins. New car registrations rose 1.6% year-over-year to 150,070 units during the month, SMMT said, the best May performance since 2021. Electric vehicles accounted for more than 47% of the total car sales in May with battery electric vehicle sales rising 25.8% year-over-year. "A return to growth for new car registrations in May is welcome but manufacturer discounting on new products continues to underpin the market, notably for electric vehicles," SMMT chief Mike Hawes said in a statement. The auto industry, already strained by supply chain disruptions and stiff competition, has been forced to cut prices amid brittle consumer sentiment, uncertain global trade policies, and the costly shift away from internal combustion engines. "The continued rise in EV registrations shows a growing consumer appetite for sustainable transport, further fuelled by the government's recent announcement to remove the need for planning applications for at home EV charging installations," said Jamie Hamilton, automotive partner and head of electric vehicles at Deloitte. Tesla (TSLA.O), opens new tab sold 2,016 cars in the UK during the month, a 36.04% decline year-over-year, according to SMMT. Data published earlier this week by research group New AutoMotive showed a bigger 45% drop in the automaker's UK sales.


Daily Mail
33 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle wanted to change surname to Spencer 'amid fears Charles was delaying Archie and Lilibet's passports because the application included HRH titles'
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle feared Archie and Lilibet's British passports were being held up at the behest of their grandfather the King over the use of their HRH titles, it was claimed today. The Sussexes are said to have become 'exasperated' about waiting months for their children's passports to arrive and believed it was being 'blocked' due to the use of their royal titles. The couple thought the application would take weeks and suspected it was because they wanted HRH on Archie and Lilibet's British travel documents. They then began exploring changing their surname to Spencer - a nod to Princess Diana, as revealed by The Mail on Sunday. 'The King hadn't wanted Archie and Lili to carry the titles, most of all the HRH, and the British passports, once created, would be the first and perhaps the only legal proof of their names', a source close to Harry and Meghan reportedly told The Guardian. 'There was clear reluctance to issue passports for the kids'. The insider has claimed that Harry wanted Archie and Lilibet, whose fourth birthday yesterday was marked with a video of her mother and father twerking before her birth, to have HRH titles so when they are adults they retain the chance to become working royals, should they wish. However, Buckingham Palace has pushed back on the claims the King or any of his staff intervened. When asked if there was any objection from Charles or aides to the passports being issued with the HRH titles, a spokesman said: 'No' but declined to comment further. Buckingham Palace denied that the King or any of his aides had anything to do with the delays in issuing their passports A gift basket and HRH note sent to Meghan's friend, CEO of IT Cosmetics Jamie Kern Lima. Meghan's spokesman last month denied that has been using it for commercial gain On their birth certificates, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's children are Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor. But according to reports their applications used the surname Sussex, not Mountbatten-Windsor, which Archie had on his previous US and British passports. The average wait for a UK passport is currently around three weeks. But apparently Harry and Meghan cancelled their initial standard applications after three months and reapplied using the UK Government's 24-hour passport service. But then their online meeting to fasttrack the applications was eventually cancelled at the 11th hour owing to a 'systems failure.' The Guardian's source claimed that Harry and Meghan feared officials in the UK were 'dragging their feet' because Archie and Lilibet's passport applications included the titles HRH. The insider added: 'Harry was at a point where British passports for his children with their updated Sussex surnames (since the death of Queen Elizabeth II) were being blocked with a string of excuses over the course of five months. 'Out of sheer exasperation he went to his uncle to effectively say: 'My family are supposed to have the same name and they're stopping that from happening because the kids are legally HRH, so if push comes to shove, if this blows up and they won't let the kids be called Sussex, then can we use Spencer as a surname?'.' The couple then reportedly asked their lawyers to write to the HM Passport Office threatening to pursue a data subject access request relating to Archie and Lilibet's applications. Days later the two passports were reportedly issued with HRH titles and Sussex as the new surname. A spokesman for Harry and Meghan said: 'We do not comment on private issues pertaining to the Duke and Duchess of Sussex 's children.' The Home Office declined to comment. Meghan Markle posted a video of her and Prince Harry twerking in a hospital room before Lilibet's birth to mark her fourth birthday yesterday The Sussexes' use of HRH has proved highly controversial because the couple are said to have reassured the Queen that they would not use the title after they emigrated to the US. But then MailOnline revealed last month that Meghan Markle calls herself Her Royal Highness to friends - but has denied that in doing so she is flouting the Megxit deal agreed with the late monarch. The former actress, 43, sparked controversy after her friend Jamie Kern Lima shared a picture of a food hamper with a note that said it was 'With the compliments of HRH The Duchess of Sussex'. Although no laws were passed or documents signed to prevent their use, Harry and Meghan's agreement with the late Queen and senior officials was that they would stop using the word 'Royal' and their HRH titles after they quit duties and emigrated to the US to become 'financially independent' from the Crown. A spokesman for the Sussexes insisted that they do not use HRH titles for commercial purposes. A source close to the royal couple suggested that the image shared by Jamie Kern Lima was taken before the Duchess launched her As Ever brand in early March. In the podcast, Jamie Kern Lima claimed that she had been sent the jam last year. The Sussexes have never had their HRH taken away by Queen Elizabeth II or King Charles. The source close to the couple said that while Meghan and Harry do not publicly use 'HRH ', their titles remain. Last weekend The Mail on Sunday revealed how Prince Harry sought advice from Princess Diana 's brother about changing his family name to Spencer. Sources told Richard Eden that the Duke of Sussex actively explored ways to assume his mother's surname – a move that would have involved ditching Mountbatten-Windsor, used by his children, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet. It is understood he discussed the issue with Earl Spencer – whose family seat is Althorp in Northamptonshire – during a rare visit to Britain, but was told that the legal hurdles were insurmountable. 'They had a very amicable conversation and Spencer advised him against taking such a step,' said a friend of Harry. Nevertheless, the fact that he consulted the Earl over the issue – a proposal that would dismay his brother and father – is a vivid expression of the toxic rift with his family. Mountbatten-Windsor is the surname available to descendants of the late Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip. It combines the Royal Family 's name of Windsor and the Duke of Edinburgh 's adopted surname. Royal author Tom Bower has claimed that 'Meghan decided her real object in life was to be Diana'. If the name change had succeeded, Meghan's daughter, who is believed to have met the King only once, would have become Lilibet Diana Spencer, a more fulsome tribute to Harry's late mother. The move would be particularly hurtful to King Charles, who cherishes the Mountbatten name just as his father did.