Will Israel's war on Iran force Keir Starmer to raise defence spending even more?
One of the curiosities of Rachel Reeves's spending review was that the defence budget is planned to rise in 2027 and then stay at that level. In two years' time, defence spending is expected to rise from 2.3 to 2.5 per cent of national income, but to rise no further after that.
This is despite Keir Starmer committing just days ago to the 'ambition' of raising it to 3 per cent 'in the next parliament when economic and fiscal conditions allow'. The prime minister spoke in sombre tones at the launch of the strategic defence review last week about the need to prepare for war and for the country to move to a state of 'war-fighting readiness'.
Yet all his chancellor did on Wednesday to increase defence spending further was to redefine 'defence spending' to include the intelligence budget, which takes the plateau to 2.6 per cent.
Given that the increase from 2.6 to 3 per cent is a substantial one, we might have expected Rachel Reeves to set out a rising trend towards it.
But no. All the prime minister's talk of a changed world in which we must be prepared to fight wars again is backed up by an increase in spending that will take us back to the level of 2010, which will be paid for by cutting the aid budget, and then … nothing more.
So far, Starmer has resisted pressure from Mark Rutte, the former Dutch prime minister who is secretary general of Nato, and from John Healey, his own defence secretary, to put a date on his 'ambition' of 3 per cent.
Just before the strategic defence review was published, Healey and Starmer clashed in private when Healey said in an interview that there was 'no doubt' that the 3 per cent would be reached in the next parliament. Leaving aside the constitutional pedantry that no parliament can bind its successor, Starmer was annoyed at this attempt to bounce him into making a firm, expensive commitment. Healey was sent out to do more interviews in which the 3 per cent figure was once again downgraded to an 'ambition'.
But there will be a Nato summit in the Hague on 24 June, at which Starmer will come under further pressure. Rutte visited London this week and – after his meeting with the prime minister – made a speech in which he publicly raised the bar. 'I expect allied leaders to agree to spend 5 per cent of GDP on defence,' he said. This is a number designed to impress Donald Trump, who has demanded that other Nato members spend 5 per cent, even though the US itself spends only 3.4 per cent of its national income on defence.
The small print of Rutte's demand adds another layer of complication, as his 5 per cent figure is made up of 3.5 per cent as conventionally defined (including intelligence spending in the new British definition) plus 1.5 per cent on cybersecurity and defence-related spending.
But his message to the British people was blunt: if we are not prepared to increase defence budgets to 3.5 per cent, he said, 'you had better learn to speak Russian'.
Given that Starmer refuses to put a date on the lower target of 3 per cent, this means that there is a yawning gap to be bridged at the Hague in 11 days' time.
Because the UK is one of the higher spending Nato members, there is some irritation in Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence at signals from Italy and Canada, which currently spend less than 1.5 per cent on defence, that they will sign up for the 3.5 per cent figure.
The Israeli bombing of Iran will add to the sense that conflicts around the world are increasingly dangerous and that the post-Cold War peace dividend has been exhausted. The main pressure on European Nato members to increase defence spending, however, remains the war in Ukraine and the reluctance of the Trump administration to pay for it – as Rutte suggested on Monday.
Britain will no doubt continue to help Israel defend itself against Iranian counterattacks, including through proxies such as the Houthis in Yemen, although Starmer's response to the attacks on Iran was more neutral than in the past. But Israel vs Iran is not a war that Nato is likely to join.
The real pressure for higher Nato defence spending remains the need to prevent Vladimir Putin from advancing in Ukraine and to deter him from threatening his other European neighbours.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
25 minutes ago
- Spectator
Can Starmer be trusted not to give away the Falkland Islands?
No sooner had the Chagos deal been struck than attention turned to the Falklands. Would Keir Starmer support the Islands as steadfastly as his predecessors? Would he seek some sort of grubby compromise with Argentina? Can we trust him with British overseas interests? As the Islands celebrate their liberation day today, marking 43 years since the end of Argentina's military occupation during the Falklands War, these questions seem particularly poignant. Many asking those questions, however, care not a jot for the people of the Falklands and are still less inclined to bother asking them what they actually think. And that's a shame, because if they did, they might be surprised by what they'd discover. There's no doubt that the hoopla surrounding Chagos has had a major impact on the inhabitants of the Falklands. That's not because they fear that Starmer and Lammy are about to hand away sovereignty.
Sky News
37 minutes ago
- Sky News
Ballymena disorder: Six arrested in Northern Ireland - as 32 officers injured in second night of violence
Six people have been arrested after disorder broke out for a second night across Northern Ireland, with 32 officers injured. The Police Service of Northern Ireland (PSNI) said officers in Ballymena "came under sustained attack over a number of hours" with fireworks, petrol bombs and bricks. Tuesday evening saw a second night of rioting and disorder in the Co Antrim town, with "sporadic disorder" reported in Belfast, Newtownabbey and Carrickfergus. Protests also took place in areas of Lisburn and Coleraine. Stormont ministers across the powersharing Executive have condemned the disorder, saying those who look to exploit anger over an alleged sexual assault in Ballymena over the weekend to "sow racial tensions... have nothing to offer their communities but division and disorder". Meanwhile, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer told MPs: "I utterly condemn the violence that we have seen overnight in Ballymena and in other parts of Northern Ireland." Some of the officers injured in Ballymena required hospital treatment, the force said, adding that it deployed Attenuating Energy Projectiles and a water cannon in an attempt to disperse the crowds. Five people were arrested on suspicion of riotous behaviour. They remain in police custody as of Wednesday morning. The PSNI said a man was also arrested on suspicion of disorderly behaviour on the O'Neill Road in Newtownabbey. Violent disorder broke out in Ballymena on Monday following a peaceful protest supporting the family of a girl who was allegedly sexually assaulted in the area over the weekend. Two teenage boys have been charged with attempted rape. The charges were read to them by a Romanian interpreter at Coleraine Magistrates' Court on Monday. Assistant Chief Constable Ryan Henderson said on Tuesday that some anti-immigrant groups then broke away from the Ballymena vigil. He described the scenes as "racist thuggery" and said the force was actively working to identify those responsible for the "racially motivated disorder". Sky correspondent Connor Gillies, who was in Ballymena on Tuesday, said one family had to barricade itself into the attic of their home as the clashes worsened. 2:11 Other families displayed posters on their windows in a desperate bid to ensure their house did not become a target, or had Union Jack flags on full display. Photos from Ballymena show one property with its windows boarded up and signs saying "Filipino lives here". 'Justice needs to take its course' In response to the disorder, the leader of the conservative party Traditional Unionist Voice, Jim Allister, said that while the scenes were "very distressing," he pointed to concerns about "unchecked migration". "There has been a bit of authorities not wanting to face up to the racial background of some of this over the years," the MP for North Antrim added. "That unchecked migration which is beyond what the town can cope with, is a source of past and future tensions, that is the reality of it." Mr Allister then called for the violence to stop, and added he had spoken to the family of the girl who was the victim of the alleged sexual assault and that they did not want to see violent scenes. "There needs now to be a period of calm and justice needs to take its course," he added. Meanwhile, the leaders of Sinn Fein, the DUP, Alliance Party and UUP called for calm in a joint statement from the Stormont Executive. They said: "While all of our citizens have the right to engage in peaceful protest, there can never be any justification for the violence that has taken place in recent days, during which residents have been terrorised and numerous PSNI officers injured." 'Absolutely no justification' for violence - minister PSNI Chief Constable Jon Boutcher said: "The mindless violence witnessed over the past two nights in Ballymena is deeply concerning and utterly unacceptable." He added that "ironically, and frustratingly, this violence threatens to derail the very pursuit of justice it claims to challenge," and said: "Let me be clear: this behaviour must stop. I appeal to everyone involved to cease all further acts of criminality and disorder immediately." Hilary Benn, secretary of state for Northern Ireland, added on X: "The terrible scenes of civil disorder we have witnessed in Ballymena again this evening have no place in Northern Ireland. "There is absolutely no justification for attacks on PSNI officers or for vandalism directed at people's homes or property."
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Dominic Cummings may have just blown the grooming gangs scandal wide open
All progressives solemnly honour LGBTQIA+ Pride Month. And Islamophobia Awareness Month. And Black History Month. Plus many other such events. This is because they're passionately committed to 'raising awareness' of social injustice. So why not the grooming gangs scandal? For some reason, this is one example of social injustice which has failed to grip progressives' attention. To rectify this, I suggest we introduce Grooming Gangs Awareness Month. Fly an official Grooming Gangs Scandal flag from all public buildings. Get civil servants to wear Grooming Gangs Scandal lanyards. Then perhaps these people might finally take an interest. Then again, we may be wasting our time. In all likelihood, progressives have never lacked 'awareness' of the grooming gangs. They just didn't want anyone else to be aware of them. Which brings me to the explosive allegations made on Thursday by Dominic Cummings. In an interview with GB News, he claimed that, when he was working at the Department for Education in the early 2010s, there were 'mass cover-ups of the whole thing in Whitehall'. Are Mr Cummings's allegations true? I don't know. But then, that's why we need the full national inquiry that Labour continues to deny us. A handful of mere 'local inquiries' won't do – not least because it wouldn't be within their scope to investigate Mr Cummings's claims about what went on in Whitehall. Yesterday, incidentally, seven members of yet another grooming gang were found guilty of raping two teenage girls in Rochdale. Labour may not like Mr Cummings. But this time I think it should listen to him. And, for that matter, to the increasingly furious public. Talking Bull Personally, I was somewhat taken aback when, on Tuesday, the new chairman of Nigel Farage's Reform UK told voters that 'immigration is the lifeblood of this country, and it always has been'. I was even more surprised when, on Wednesday, he told Richard Madeley on ITV's Good Morning Britain that he was once strangled by an evil spirit masquerading as the ghost of his late grandmother. To my mind, though, Dr David Bull's most intriguing comment of the week was this. Asked whether he supports calls to ban the burqa in this country, he replied: 'I'm very anxious about the rise in people that think it is OK to hide their faces. We had a conversation yesterday about whether that was the burqa, crash helmets, scarves or whatever.' Hang on. Crash helmets? I for one have always admired Reform's bracingly no-nonsense attitude towards health-and-safety-gone-mad. But a ban on crash helmets, I feel, might be taking it a touch too far. In any case, I'm not convinced that there's a huge public clamour for such a ban. There are plenty of people who want to ban the burqa, and they have strong arguments for doing so. But I've never heard a voter say: 'I'm sorry, but I'm sick of seeing all these women walking around the streets in crash helmets. It's not as if it's their choice, either. Their husbands force them to do it. The crash helmet is a disgusting symbol of misogyny and patriarchal oppression. 'Also, crash helmets make normal human interaction impossible. When a motorcyclist zooms past me at 70mph, I expect to be able to see his face. 'Anyway, it's just not British. If motorcyclists want to wear crash helmets, they can go and do it in their own country.' Remarks like those, I would guess, aren't heard all that often in focus groups. So why Dr Bull raised the idea, entirely unprompted, in reply to a question about banning the burqa, I don't know. Still, I'm not complaining. Far from it. When I stepped down as this newspaper's parliamentary sketch writer in 2021, after 10 years, I felt that politics was in danger of becoming dull. The previous decade had teemed with the most glorious eccentrics, on Left and Right alike. Increasingly, however, they seemed to be fading from view, to be replaced by robotic regiments of Starmers and Sunaks. How wonderful it is to see a new generation coming through. Violence: a Left-wing guide I don't know whether you ever read Left-wing news outlets. But if you do, this week you'll probably have noticed something peculiar. In such outlets, the violence in Ballymena is always described as 'rioting' – yet the violence in LA is always described as 'protests'. You may well have wondered why this is. After all, both Ballymena and LA have seen cars set on fire, missiles thrown, and police officers injured. These are all very bad things. So why don't Left-wing news outlets refer to both as 'rioting'? The answer is simple. The violence in Ballymena is being perpetrated by people who are against mass immigration. The violence in LA, in contrast, is being perpetrated by people who are in favour not only of mass immigration, but of 'irregular' (i.e., illegal) immigration. And, just as importantly, they hate Donald Trump. Therefore, their actions must be made to sound understandable and legitimate. In other words: sometimes setting people's cars on fire is nasty and frightening. And sometimes it's noble and compassionate. Please update your records accordingly.
