What UK's Strategic Defense Review means for Ukraine
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced on June 2 that the United Kingdom is moving to "warfighting readiness," in large part in response to the full-scale invasion of Ukraine and the threat Russia poses to Europe.
He made the comment as his government unveiled its latest Strategic Defense Review, which U.K. General Richard Barrons, one of the review's authors, described as the "most profound" change in U.K. defense in 150 years.
The review sets out ambitious new targets, including at least 12 new attack submarines, fleets of drones and autonomous vehicles, as well as 7,000 new long-range weapons.
Yet it also comes with urgent warnings.
The review reveals that the U.K.'s Armed Forces are currently unprepared to fight adversaries such as Russia or China, nor could they conduct high-intensity warfare in a war like that in Ukraine.
Insufficient munition stockpiles, low troop numbers, and ageing equipment are just a few of the weaknesses underpinning its assessment.
"The speed of development in Ukraine is so far ahead of what countries like the U.K. is capable of."
But as well as committing to bolstering its own defense capabilities, the U.K. must also manage the commitments already made to Kyiv, which it has vowed to support with a "100-year partnership."
The U.K. has been one of Kyiv's closest supporters since the start of the full-scale invasion, and the review reiterates long-term support for Ukraine, committing 3 billion pounds ($4.06 billion) annually in military aid.
"The bottom line is that all of this is about defending the U.K. after the conflict moves on from Ukraine primarily," Keir Giles, a senior consulting fellow at Chatham House, a U.K.-based think tank, told the Kyiv Independent.
"Whether it's positive, negative, or catastrophic, either way, that's when the U.K. and its allies need to be ready for Russia's next move."
The U.K. wants to create a more flexible procurement process, as demonstrated by that developed by Ukraine throughout the full-scale invasion, a dynamic it says would be vital should the U.K. deploy troops in support of a ceasefire.
The review urges deeper defense industrial collaboration, including joint ventures and helping Ukraine access global markets, as well as rebuilding and sustaining its defense sector.
This could include helping Ukraine service Soviet-era equipment still used abroad. The U.K. also aims to learn from Ukraine's experience in modern warfare, particularly in land combat, drones, and hybrid threats.
However, the review highlights challenges — U.K. stockpiles of weapons such as Storm Shadow long-range missiles have been depleted through its support to Ukraine, and years of underinvestment have weakened domestic defense capacity.
The U.K. has announced that it will build six new munition factories. This indicates a significant attempt to address one of the key criticisms of European defense, which is its lack of industrial base and reliance on U.S. support.
While U.K. Defense Secretary John Healey has said that "we should expect to see new factories opening very soon," it is not clear how quickly this will translate into meaningful battlefield assistance for Ukraine's Armed Forces.
"The speed of development in Ukraine is so far ahead of what countries like the U.K. are capable of, the best-case outcome for Ukraine would just be sending the money there to build stuff," Giles said.
When asked how Ukraine could be best supported outside of the recommendations in the review, Giles said the "maximum support" should be given to Ukraine, without the hesitancy about doing damage to Russia."
We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Canada to hit NATO spending target this year as it shifts defense focus toward EU
Canada will reach NATO's defense spending target of 2% of GDP this year, five years ahead of schedule, Prime Minister Mark Carney announced on June 9. Speaking at the University of Toronto, Carney said the move is part of a strategic pivot away from reliance on the U.S. and toward deeper cooperation with the European Union, citing growing security threats from Russia, China, and other adversaries. Carney said Canada's current military capabilities are inadequate, noting that only one of four submarines is operational and much of the maritime and land fleet is outdated. To reverse this trend, his government is launching a $6.8 (9.3 billion Canadian dollars) boost to the defense budget for 2025-26. The investment will be tabled in Parliament through supplementary estimates and directed toward rebuilding the Canadian Armed Forces, upgrading equipment, and expanding domestic production capabilities. The new defense posture includes reassessing major procurement decisions, such as the planned purchase of U.S.-made F-35 jets, and prioritizing partnerships with European firms for equipment acquisitions. Carney emphasized that three-quarters of Canada's defense capital spending has gone to the U.S., a pattern he said must end. "We're doing this for us," Carney was quoted as saying. "Relatedly we're doing it as a strong NATO partner, we're a firm believer in NATO, and we're standing shoulder to shoulder with our NATO allies, we'll continue to do so. ." Carney's announcement comes just ahead of the NATO leaders' summit in late June, where member states are expected to commit to higher defense spending thresholds of up to 5%. The prime minister said Canada would support a new NATO defense industrial pledge and participate in the EU's ReArm Europe initiative. He added that future cooperation with the EU will be a major theme of the upcoming Canada-EU summit. Read also: Ukraine war latest: Ukraine shoots down nearly 500 drones, missiles in Russian record strike, Air Force says We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Five things to know about Canada's plan to meet the NATO defence spending target
OTTAWA — Prime Minister Mark Carney is promising that Canada will quickly boost its defence spending to hit the NATO member target of two per cent of national GDP this year. Canada has long promised to meet the target but has never had a detailed plan to get there. The announcement comes as NATO allies prepare for talks on raising the spending target to five per cent at the annual summit this month. Here's what you need to know about the announcement. 1. What is the NATO spending target? All NATO allies, Canada included, committed to spending the equivalent of two per cent of their GDP on defence in 2006. In 2014, NATO leaders agreed formally that countries that were not meeting the target must move toward it within a decade. After Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, allies agreed at the 2023 NATO summit to make two per cent the minimum spending target. Many European countries have rapidly scaled up their defence spending in response to Russia's war on Ukraine. As of this year, 22 of the 32 NATO member states are spending at least two per cent of their national GDP on defence. Canada is not among them. A leaked Pentagon document obtained by The Washington Post in 2023 quoted then-prime minister Justin Trudeau telling NATO officials that Canada would not meet the two per cent target. Under pressure from allies, the Trudeau government later promised to hit the two per cent benchmark by 2032. In January, then-defence minister Bill Blair told reporters he was trying to speed up that timeline to 2027. 2. Why is the target changing? At this year's NATO leaders' summit in The Hague, allies will discuss a proposal to boost the spending target to five per cent of GDP. That's expected to be broken down into two parts — 3.5 per cent for what NATO calls core defence spending and another 1.5 per cent for a broader category of defence and security-related spending. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters last week there was "broad support" among allies for the change and that he had total confidence they would agree to it at the summit, which is being held June 24-26. The change is seen as a response to U.S. President Donald Trump's demands for allies to pull more weight in NATO. Among NATO members, the U.S. spends the most on its military in dollar terms. In March, Trump suggested America might not defend its allies if they don't meet the target. "If they don't pay, I'm not going to defend them," he said. According to NATO's most recent figures, U.S. defence spending was estimated at 3.19 per cent of GDP in 2024, down from 3.68 per cent a decade ago. It's the only NATO ally whose defence spending has dropped since 2014. 3. How much is Canada spending on defence? According to the latest NATO projections, Canada was on track to spend 1.45 per cent of GDP on defence in 2024-25. NATO allies also have agreed that 20 per cent of their spending should go toward equipment. In 2024, Canada was on track to spend 17.8 per cent of its total on equipment, making it one of only three countries to miss both parts of the target. Carney's announcement on Monday amounts to another $9.3 billion in spending in this fiscal year, 2025-26. Senior government officials told reporters at a briefing Monday morning that the country's defence spending for the fiscal year was projected to be $53.4 billion. With the announcement of this new spending, that sum is expected to rise to $62.7 billion for 2025-26 — or two per cent of Canada's national GDP, which is estimated at just over $3.1 trillion this year. While most of that — $53.4 billion — is Department of National Defence spending, about $14 billion is going to other government departments, including $370 million for the Communications Security Establishment. 3. What is the money being spent on? A large amount of the spending announced on Monday — $2.63 billion — is meant to "empower the military to recruit and retain the personnel needed to carry out its mandate," said a Government of Canada press release. The government says that funding will help accelerate military recruitment and expand the civilian defence workforce. It includes a pay raise for members. The Canadian Armed Forces is short more than 13,000 personnel in its regular and reserve forces. In February, Chief of the Defence Staff Gen. Jennie Carignan said the Armed Forces was on track to meet its recruitment goal of enrolling 6,496 members this fiscal year. The military said it was aiming to reach its approved strength of 71,500 regular forces members and 30,000 reserve members by April 2029. Another $2.1 billion is set aside to diversify Canada's defence partnerships and help build the domestic defence industry. Carney has said Canada wants to join ReArm Europe, an 800 billion-euro plan to beef up the defence of EU countries. Government officials said Monday that $2.1 billion could help Canada enter joint procurements or multilateral initiatives with other countries. 5. What is happening with the Coast Guard? The government is planning to include $2.5 billion it spends on the Canadian Coast Guard in its NATO spending this year — about 60 per cent of the agency's total budget. The Coast Guard will remain part of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. It's responsible for ensuring the safety of people in Canadian waters, carrying out search-and-rescue operations and conducting research, and has a fleet of icebreakers. The Coast Guard also has a mandate to "ensure Canada's sovereignty and security by establishing a strong federal presence in our waters," according to the Government of Canada. Government officials said there is no plan to arm the Coast Guard or its members. They say its inclusion in Canada's overall defence and security strategy reflects its role in providing what they call maritime domain awareness. The intent, officials told reporters, is to improve inter-service communication, particularly in the Arctic region. The increased co-operation could involve sending military members on Coast Guard trips, for example. The government said it's boosting the Coast Guard budget by $100 million. — With files from Kyle Duggan and The Associated Press This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 9, 2025. The Canadian Press Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Trump may have to choose: Making trade deals or keeping his car tariffs
President Donald Trump is telling domestic audiences he won't cut his 25 percent tariffs on foreign cars as part of any trade deals he negotiates. But other countries — who collectively send millions of vehicles to the U.S. each year — haven't gotten that message. Trading partners like the EU, Japan and South Korea are laboring under the impression that the auto tariffs, which Trump imposed in April, are still on the table, according to two people familiar with the talks between Trump officials and those countries, granted anonymity to discuss private conversations. If Trump is really unwilling to lower or eliminate his tariffs on foreign cars, it could prove to be a major hurdle to securing meaningful trade deals with some of the country's top trading partners. Japan, South Korea and Germany sold more than $121 billion in cars and car parts in the U.S. in 2024. The White House did not answer when asked if auto tariffs were on the table for negotiations and instead reiterated the goal of the tariffs. 'No president has taken a greater interest in reviving America's once-dominant auto industry than President Trump, and the auto industry is a key focus of the Trump administration's trade and economic policies,' said Kush Desai, a White House spokesperson. 'Discussions with our major trading partners continue, and the Trump administration continues to seek better trade deals for American industries and workers.' A decision to lift the tariffs for more countries, particularly those whose companies compete most fiercely with American carmakers, risks alienating a powerful manufacturing bloc and undercutting a central tenet of Trump's trade agenda — forcing companies to build more products in the U.S. The Trump administration has assured American automakers that when it comes to auto tariffs being used as a bargaining chip, they have 'nothing to worry about,' according to a person familiar with discussions between the administration and Detroit's 'Big Three' auto companies, granted anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the talks. Trump has said a deal to lower the tariff on a small number of British cars, announced last month, was an exception. 'I won't do that deal with cars' for other countries, Trump said when announcing the terms of negotiation with the U.K. on May 8. The British auto brand Rolls-Royce is 'a very special car and it's a very limited number too. It's not one of the monster car companies that makes millions of cars,' he noted. Even that agreement, which lowered the tariff on 100,000 cars, less than 1 percent of total U.S. annual car sales, drew a sharp rebuke from U.S. automakers. 'This hurts American automakers, suppliers, and auto workers,' the American Automotive Policy Council, which represents General Motors, Ford and Stellantis, said at the time, saying they hoped it 'does not set a precedent for future negotiations with Asian and European competitors.' The tension between the two goals — boosting domestic auto production while also negotiating delicate agreements to lower trade barriers — highlights the challenge facing the administration as it races to secure deals with dozens of countries before the president's double-digit 'reciprocal' tariffs are slated to kick back in next month. 'To ease the sting of those tariffs on the auto sectors for Korea and Japan is of course a high priority for them,' said Michael Beeman, a former assistant U.S. trade representative who focused on Japan and South Korea. 'I think for those countries, to be able to declare success from the talks at home, they would expect some sort of consideration." The auto tariffs have already been a sticking point in negotiations with Japan and South Korea, both of which are invested in maintaining a high level of domestic auto manufacturing. Auto exports from South Korea to the U.S. have exploded over the past 20 years, from $8.7 billion in 2005 to $37.3 billion in 2024, according to data collected by the Census Bureau. Japanese Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has said publicly that any trade deal with Japan would have to result in lower auto tariffs. Now, as the two countries are on their fifth round of talks, with a planned meeting between Ishiba and Trump at the G7 in Canada in two weekends, both countries are projecting optimism about a deal. "I think we'll also need to address, at a minimum, the auto [Section] 232 tariffs,' said Wendy Cutler, a former negotiator with the U.S. trade representative's office and the vice president at the Asia Society Policy Institute, said when asked what it would take to get a deal with Japan. Cutler said any deal with Japan or South Korea could have a lower tariff for a certain number of vehicles, similar to the deal with the U.K. Or, 'they could also just be very vague and say that the U.S. notes Japan's concern on the auto tariffs, and both sides agree to negotiate possible lowering of the tariffs in this detailed negotiation to follow," she said. Trump has already agreed to lower tariffs on automobiles once. In his first trade agreement since imposing a global 10 percent tariff on nearly every U.S. trading partner and potentially higher rates on more than 60 countries, Trump struck an agreement with the U.K. that would allow the country to ship 100,000 vehicles into the country at a 10 percent tariff — lower than the current 25 percent tariff on automobiles and auto parts. The deal drew condemnation from American automakers, who noted that it meant a lower tariff on cars imported from the U.K. than on North American-made cars that include U.S.-made parts. They expressed concern that lowering tariffs with major auto manufacturing countries like Japan, South Korea and Germany would make it more expensive to build cars with parts from North America — creating an unfair playing field and effectively undercutting the administration's effort to boost domestic auto manufacturing. Vehicles made across the integrated North American supply chain still face a 25 percent tariff on non-U.S. made content, even if the vehicle is compliant with the U.S.-Mexico-Canada trade agreement that Trump negotiated in his first term. The Trump administration has continued to press foreign automakers to move production to the U.S. Last week, Trump met with German automakers, who offered $100 billion in investment in the U.S., according to Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick. Trump — and Republicans on Capitol Hill — say those commitments are a sign that tariffs are working. "They make BMWs in South Carolina, Volvo. They make Mercedes in Alabama,' Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) pointed out during a Senate Appropriations Committee hearing Wednesday. Under Trump, 'They're talking about making the engine now in South Carolina. They're talking about more content in South Carolina.' There has yet to be an uptick in U.S. auto manufacturing, however, a reminder that the investment pledges will take years to fully develop. Auto manufacturing jobs held steady between April and May, though there were 2,240 fewer auto manufacturing jobs in May, compared to 2024, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. While welcoming the announcements, the Trump White House has given no indication the investment pledges will convince the president to lower auto tariffs on foreign countries. 'I mean, unless somebody shows me that there's another kind of a car that's comparable to a Rolls-Royce,' Trump said in May, 'and there aren't too many.'
