PM warned that attempts to prevent conflict will be harmed by cuts to overseas aid budget
Former spymasters, military chiefs and leading politicians are among a group of more than 60 public figures to sign a letter urging the prime minister to allocate more of the UK's reduced overseas aid budget to preventing wars.
A failure to act risks leaving the government facing what they described as a "global conflict crisis" with "one hand tied behind its back".
The letter to Sir Keir Starmer, shared with Sky News, said violent conflict is impacting more countries across the globe than at any time since the Second World War.
"They are disrupting economies and diverting the world's attention away from human rights, climate change and gender equality," according to the letter, signed by, among others, Baroness Eliza Manningham-Buller and Lord Jonathan Evans, former director generals of MI5, and Lord Mark Sedwill, a former national security adviser.
1:55
"To durably strengthen national security, therefore, the government must invest not just in defence, but also in development and diplomacy."
The group is not calling on the prime minister to reverse a decision to shrink the overseas aid budget to 0.3% of GDP from 0.5% by 2027 to fund an increase in defence spending.
Instead, they are focused on the proportion of the diminished international development budget that is spent on conflict prevention and peacebuilding.
The ratio had been 4% of total overseas aid spending in 2018.
But the level has shrunk to between 1 and 1.5% today, according to Lord Jack McConnell, co-chair of the All Party Parliamentary Group on Conflict Prevention, Conflict Resolution and Peacebuilding, which organised the letter.
The group wants the proportion to be returned to the equivalent of 4%.
"Without this, the UK might risk facing the global conflict crisis with one hand tied behind its back," the letter warned.
The signatories said they would like to see an all-of-government approach to tackling violent conflict to be included in an upcoming national security strategy, which is due to be published before a NATO summit next week.
Among the other people to sign the letter are General Lord Richard Dannatt, a former head of the army, Air Chief Marshal Sir Michael Wigston KCB, a former head of the Royal Air Force, Tan Dhesi MP, chair of the defence select committee, and Sarah Champion MP, chair of the international development committee.
Conflict prevention and resolution efforts that the UK has in the past championed include helping to secure peace agreements in the Philippines, Colombia and Ethiopia. Another initiative is the "Women, Peace and Security" agenda.
"We are gravely concerned that these initiatives may disappear amidst cuts to the aid budget," the letter said.
"This would be a false economy, as conflicts left to escalate and spread will lead to further insecurity, forced displacement and humanitarian crises to which the armed forces and aid agencies must respond."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
24 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
The lucrative reason Prince Harry and Meghan wrecked any chance of a compromise with the Royal Family during 'Megxit', royal author claims
Prince Harry and Meghan allegedly wrecked any chance of a compromise with the Royal Family during 'Megxit' because they wanted the 'freedom to make money and dip their toes into politics', a royal author has claimed. When Harry and Meghan stepped down as working royals in 2020, hopes were high within the Firm that a compromise could be found. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed their decision to 'step back as senior members' was to become more financially independent and to enjoy privacy from the prying eyes of the media. At the time it seemed plausible that these wishes could be fulfilled alongside an agreement to represent the Crown at a select number of events every year. However, according to royal author Valentine Low, any prospect of a soft 'Megxit' was scuppered by the Sussexes over finances. Writing in his tell-all book Courtiers, Low claims that Meghan's desire to 'earn money for herself' led the couple to abandon their duties entirely. Low revealed that during discussions about how to reach a happy middle ground - which could please the whole family - multiple scenarios were explored. These ranged from Harry and Meghan 'having a month a year to do their own thing' to 'spending most of their time privately but doing a select number of royal activities'. There was apparently a 'positive atmosphere' in the room, with each party believing a deal was close. The one caveat for the Sussexes continuing royal duties - however small or minor - was that they must stick to the 'normal rules about royal behaviour'. Crucially, that would mean Harry and Meghan could not 'act or take decisions in order to gain financially'. Low writes: 'Some suspected that in the end she wanted to make money. And the only way she was going to do that was by leaving her royal life behind and going back to America.' On top of this, the couple wanted the 'freedom to dip their toes into American politics', which would represent a major breach of royal protocol for a family with a long history of being staunchly apolitical. 'There was no way for the two sides to reach an agreement on that point. 'Crucially, it was the Queen who took the view that unless they were prepared to abide by the restrictions that applied to working members of the Royal Family, they could not be allowed to carry out official duties.' Indeed, since 'Megxit' the couple have 'dipped their toes' into US politics. During the 2020 US presidential race, the couple endorsed Joe Biden in all but name in a video address urging voters to 'reject hate speech', while Meghan labelled it the 'most important election of our lifetime'. The duke said at the time: 'This election I am not able to vote in the US. But many of you may not know that I haven't been able to vote in the UK my entire life. As we approach this November, it's vital that we reject hate speech, misinformation and online negativity.' While Harry and Meghan did not name their favoured candidate, many viewers thought it 'obvious' they were backing Joe Biden over Donald Trump. As such, the Sussexes were accused of 'violating' the terms of their 'Megxit' deal. In September 2020, Trump said that he was 'no fan' of the duchess after the couple released their video. In the aftermath, Republicans and other critics called on the Royal Family to strip the couple of their titles, calling their interference 'inappropriate'. In last year's election, the couple stayed publicly neutral and instead urged Americans to go out and vote. The statement read: 'Voting is not just a right; it's a fundamental way to influence the fate of our communities. 'At The Archewell Foundation, we recognize that civic engagement, no matter one's political party, is at the heart of a more just and equitable world. 'By participating in initiatives like this, we aim to amplify the message that every voice matters.' Free from the shackles of royal protocol, Meghan appears more ambitious than ever. The former Suits actress reportedly hopes to become a billionaire by launching a career in media and as a entrepreneur. In March 2024, she soft-launched American Riviera Orchard before changing the company's name to As Ever. Announcing the venture, Meghan said: 'This new chapter is an extension of what has always been my love language, beautifully weaving together everything I cherish - food, gardening, entertaining, thoughtful living, and finding joy in the everyday.' The food products sold by the brand include an assortment of teas, edible flower sprinkles and a £20 jar of honey. Speaking on an episode of her podcast, Confessions Of A Female Founder, Meghan revealed she has decided to 'just pause' restocking her As Ever brand after previously selling out of products in less than an hour. Meghan has invested in a number of companies including the vegan coffee brand Clevr Blends and haircare line Highbrow Hippie. She has also invested in asset manager Ethic, which focuses on sustainable investments. Harry and Meghan signed a lucrative £18million deal with Spotify in 2020. However despite appearing to be a joint venture, the only show they produced was hosted by Meghan. In the series, titled Archetypes, Meghan interviewed various celebrities from Serena Williams to Paris Hilton. The deal was 'mutually ended' in June 2023 with sources claiming the music streaming giant did not see enough content to warrant the full payout. Earlier this year, the duchess launched her Confessions Of A Female Founder podcast, which saw her chat with female business owners from an array of successful companies. In a slight career change, Meghan also penned a children's book in 2021 titled The Bench. It follows the relationship of a father and son through the eyes of the mother and received mixed reviews from critics. In their television projects, Harry and Meghan have kept a much more united front, but even so, the couple appear to be working separately more often. Although an official figure was never announced, Harry and Meghan's deal with Netflix was allegedly worth around £80million, and the couple produced multiple shows. In 2022, the first Netflix series about the Sussexes was released aptly named Harry and Meghan. While it holds the record for the biggest debut for a Netflix documentary it received mixed reviews. The pair were also executive producers on the Polo sports documentary series which followed athletes at the US Open Polo Championship. In 2023, Meghan did not join Harry as an executive producer on the Heart Of Invictus series, although the duke and duchess did appear together in the show. Meghan's first major solo television project was her lifestyle programme called With Love, Meghan, which saw her team up with a number of famous guests to cook and create homeware products. Harry was almost entirely absent from the series, aside from a very brief cameo in the last episode. A source from the show has since reported that neither Harry nor their children will appear in the next season. Although The Mail On Sunday revealed in May that Harry is planning to launch his own as-yet-undisclosed commercial venture in the next few months, he remains focused on his charity work. Harry is still involved heavily with the Invictus Games and the foundation which supports the tournament as well as the HALO Trust - a charity working to remove landmines which Princess Diana supported. The duke has also launched other projects in recent years, including an eco-travel campaign through his non-profit Travalyst, aimed at encouraging sustainable travel. And in November 2023, he became the global ambassador for Scotty's Little Soldiers - a charity that cares for children whose parents died while serving in the Armed Forces. Earlier this year, Harry had his most high profile fallout with a charity to date when he and Prince Seeiso of Lesotho resigned from their roles as patrons of Sentebale.
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
The tiny Swedish island regiment tasked with protecting Europe from Russia
As an army helicopter buzzes overhead, Tomas Ängshammar points proudly at the sleek barracks of the Swedish armed forces' newest regiment: P18 Gotland. The Scandinavian building is clad in muted pinewood and looks more like a modernist hotel than a military headquarters. 'It has room for 240 conscripts,' says Mr Ängshammar, the regiment's communications director, 'but from August this year, it [will be] too small because we're going to have 300 conscripts. 'So we're building a second barracks behind this one and we're planning for a third.' The rapid military build-up on Gotland Island is a testament to just how seriously the Swedish government is taking the risk that Russia once again poses – both to Sweden and northern Europe more broadly. Less than 200 miles from the Russian exclave of Kaliningrad and its Baltic fleet, this highly strategic island was heavily defended during the Cold War. Hundreds of defunct bunkers dot the coastline. But following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Europe was considered to be at peace and Gotland was demilitarised. The final troops left in 2005. 'After the regiments were closed down, [everything] had been sold, we had no infrastructure left,' Mr Ängshammar says with a sigh. ' It seemed like a good idea at the time. Just a couple of years later, it wasn't such a good idea any more.' The first alarm bell came in 2008 with Russia's invasion of Georgia. But it wasn't until Russia's annexation of Crimea from Ukraine in 2014 that Sweden decided to reverse course. Swedish troops were posted back on the island in 2016, and the Gotland Regiment was formally re-established in 2018. Numbers were small at first, but recruitment and growth have picked up significantly since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in 2022. It now has between 300 and 400 soldiers, with an aim to have at least 4,000 fully mobilised conscripts for Task Force Gotland by 2027. The new P18 Gotland regiment revolves around a mechanised unit, with around 14 German Leopard tanks, a fleet of Swedish CV90s and a range of other armoured vehicles. That might sound like a lot for a piece of land smaller than Essex – but the aim is deterrence. Gotland must not be seen as low-hanging fruit. 'I'm sure that [Vladimir] Putin even has both eyes on Gotland. Putin's goal is to gain control of the Baltic Sea,' Micael Bydén, Sweden's ex-defence chief, said last year. 'The Baltic Sea must not become Putin's playground.' If the island fell to Moscow, it would effectively cut off air and sea supply routes to the Baltic states of Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, isolating them from Nato support and leaving the door wide open for Russian aggression. ' Because of its geographic position, with sensors and systems based on this island you can more or less dictate who flies and sails in and around the Baltic Sea,' says Col Dan Rasmussen, head of the Swedish Armed Forces on Gotland. 'That means that Sweden and Nato have to be in possession of the island. Otherwise, reinforcements within a Nato context will be a problem.' Since Sweden joined Nato along with Finland in 2024, the Baltic Sea has been referred to as the Nato lake. That speaks to how vital Gotland is for the Alliance. But the island is not impregnable, and has vulnerabilities. A Russian 'shadow fleet' operates in what should be Sweden's exclusive economic zone in the seas around it. There have also been numerous instances of sabotage blamed on Russia: in March, the island's water supply was tampered with; in February, an undersea fibre-optic cable was damaged. ' The challenges are the reinforcements and the sustainability of course,' Col Rasmussen explains. 'That's why we are trying to make sure that we have all the stocks and the equipment on the island that [we need].' But he also points to unique advantages, including a 500-600-strong volunteer Home Guard made up of dedicated locals. 'We are living and breathing here on the island. The Home Guard knows every path, every road, every suspicious person showing up. It's a home game for us.' In the meantime, Col Rasmussen's Gotland Regiment trains for all sorts of scenarios, everything from a campaign of harassment by drones to missile bombardment to a loss of power. The most extreme situation involves Russia capturing the island, prompting Sweden to invoke Nato's Article 5, and an international coalition swooping in to try to recapture it. That's roughly the scenario that British, American and Swedish forces came together to practice last month as part of the Swift Response phase of the US-led annual Defender military drills. It begins with more than 100 British paratroopers from the elite 16th Air Assault Brigade throwing themselves out of two A400 turboprop military transport planes into a field bathed in afternoon sunlight. Watching them parachute to the ground with a satisfied smile is the 16th's commander, Brigadier Mark Berry. Not only is this the first exercise of its kind for the British army using the A400 and low-level parachutes, it's also the first time they have done anything like this in Sweden. ' It's relatively new for us to be operating this closely with Sweden,' he explains. 'It's a brilliant opportunity to understand how they operate, for them to understand how we operate.' 'This exercise is … a rehearsal for seizing this piece of terrain, a viable landing zone for parachutists and then supporting the Swedes [to] defend their nation against any aggressor,' he says. But, he adds: 'You could replicate exactly this scenario in any part of Europe. What you are seeing here is a very strong capability. 'I am very confident that as European partners we can provide a very credible deterrent to any adversary.' The paratroopers trudge past us towards the mobile border control van to clear immigration control, before gathering in a nearby field to debrief ahead of the rest of the exercise. That involves a three-mile overnight march amid 'enemy fire' to secure an old road and convert it into a runway that could take delivery of weapons and reinforcement troops. To round things off, at the break of dawn, US Marines and British Royal Horse Artillery Gunners conduct the first-ever simultaneous live firing of their signature multiple rocket launch systems, the Himars and MLRS. Five loud thuds echo across the island. Then everything falls silent and the cool morning air is once again filled with the sound of birdsong. This sort of high-level, international military activity has become normal for the Gotland Regiment. For them, the threat of Russia is real and immediate. 'Vladimir, you're drunk!' But most locals have a more laid-back attitude. In the medieval walled city of Visby, one shop has a sign in the window: 'Vladimir, you're drunk – go home.' Down on the seafront, residents are enjoying a lunchtime dip in the Baltic. As she dries herself off, Tuva says that she is 'not particularly worried about [Russia]'. 'There has been a threat for as long the Gotlanders can remember,' she says. 'My personal opinion is that if Putin wanted to invade this island, he would've done so 50 years ago. 'I don't think he has enough army to do it. So you feel safe here.' But others are less sanguine. Reclining on a deck chair next to a defunct Second World War bunker-turned-art exhibition, Marie takes in the sea view. On holiday from Gothenburg, she is one of nearly a million Swedish tourists who come to Gotland every summer to enjoy the peaceful forests, medieval churches and pristine beaches. But she admits she did discuss the risk of Russian aggression before coming. ' We talked a little bit about it some days ago with our friends here. So yes, I've been thinking about it,' she says. ' You don't think it can happen,' she adds, 'but you don't know. It can change from one day to the next.'
Telegraph
38 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Foreign steel to be used for nearly a fifth of British railway upgrades
Foreign steel will account for almost a fifth of Britain's future railway upgrades following a 'landmark' government contract. Ministers said on Tuesday that British Steel had been handed a £500 million contract to make new rails for Network Rail. Transport Secretary Heidi Alexander said: 'This landmark contract truly transforms the outlook for British Steel and its dedicated workforce in Scunthorpe, building on its decades-long partnership with Network Rail to produce rail for Britain's railways.' Under the new deal just over 80 per cent of Network Rail's supply will now come from the UK. From July, the remaining steel for rails will be sold to Britain by two Austrian and German companies, Voestalpine and Saarstahl. Network Rail said that in 2019 '95 per cent' of its rails were made in Britain. By April this year that figure had fallen to around 80 per cent. Under the Labour Government's newly unveiled plans, British Steel will only supply 377,000 of the 450,000 tonnes of rails being bought over the next five years. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds said: 'This is great news for British Steel and a vote of confidence in the UK's expertise in steelmaking, which will support thousands of skilled jobs for years to come.' Network Rail commercial director Clive Berrington added: 'We are committed to buying British where it makes economic sense to do so and British Steel remain extremely competitive in the provision of rail and will remain our main supplier in the years ahead.' The Labour Government nationalised the Scunthorpe steelworks in April at a cost to the taxpayer of £100 million, taking control after Chinese former owner Jingye threatened to shut down the site's blast furnaces. Around 2,700 jobs were at risk of redundancy until the Government stepped in with emergency legislation that was voted through Parliament on a Saturday. Jingye said in March that British Steel was losing £700,000 a day, with Zengwei An, its then-chief executive, saying at the time that the shutdown 'is a necessary decision given the hugely challenging circumstances the business faces.' In a statement, the company added that the Scunthorpe site was 'no longer financially sustainable due to highly challenging market conditions, the imposition of tariffs, and higher environmental costs relating to the production of high-carbon steel.' Scunthorpe is the only place in Britain capable of making so-called 'virgin steel', high purity metal refined from raw materials. Under net zero plans embraced by both Labour and the Conservatives, politicians had been urging steelmakers to concentrate on 'green steel', which is made by melting recycled steel items in electric-arc furnaces. Such green steel contains impurities that make it weaker than proper virgin steel. In the 2000s Scunthorpe was given substantial upgrades to allow it to produce rails in 216-metre lengths, Modern Railways magazine reported. Nowhere else in the country is capable of doing so, meaning the site is vital for Network Rail's future.
