
Britain announces $20B boost to make armed forces 'battle ready'
June 2 (UPI) -- British Prime Minister Keir Starmer announced plans Monday to inject an additional $20.3 billion into the country's nuclear weapons program to combat the "threat from Russia" and China and build 12 new nuclear-powered attack submarines.
The new spending is part of a major Strategic Defense Review unveiled by Starmer at a military contractor on Clydeside in Scotland, home to the country's Trident submarine nuclear deterrent, aimed at restoring Britain's fighting capability and making it "war-ready" within two years for a conflict in Europe and/or the Atlantic.
"We are moving to war-fighting readiness as the central purpose of our armed forces. When we are being directly threatened by states with advanced military forces, the most effective way to deter them is to be ready, and frankly, to show them that we're ready to deliver peace through strength," Starmer said.
"I believe the best way to deter conflict is to prepare for it."
The plan, was Starmer said, "a blueprint to make Britain safer and stronger, a battle-ready, bomber-clad nation with the strongest alliances and the most advanced capabilities, equipped for the decades to come."
However, he stressed that it would be a "NATO first" policy, putting the military alliance at the center of everything the United Kingdom did.
In addition to the nuclear warheads program and submarines, which will be built under the AUKUS security pact signed in 2021, other review pledges include six new munitions plants and adding 7,000 new long-range weapons to Britain's arsenal, a "hybrid" Royal Navy that uses drones alongside warships, submarines and aircraft and invest in improved housing and equipment for members of the armed forces.
While Starmer said he was unable to give assurances that defense spending would reach the government's goal 3% of GDP by 2034, everything in the defense blueprint was deliverable within the 2.5% figure the government committed to in February, due by Fiscal Year 2027.
Britain's fiscal year runs April 1 through March 31.
The government has promised $12 billion of the $20 billion will come from economic growth, rather than spending cuts or tax hikes.
The 3% is an "ambition," and the government's refusal to set a firm timeline, and again tying it in with economic growth, raised eyebrows.
Starmer rejected suggestions that the failure to commit to a 3.5% minimum by 2032 called for by Secretary-General Mark Rutte and others, demonstrated a lack of commitment to the 32-member-country alliance.
The SDR was slammed by both the opposition Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.
"With the prime minister unable to even confirm a date for hitting 3% on defense spending, the SDR really is unravelling. How can they deliver what they've promised?" Shadow Defense Secretary James Cartledge wrote on X.
Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch accused Starmer's ruling Labour Party of not being able to "even hold a defense policy together for 48 hours."
"How can they be trusted to defend Britain? In the most dangerous era in a generation, they found BILLIONS for the Chagos surrender -- but can't commit to properly funding our armed forces," she wrote in a social media post.
Writing on X, Helen Maguire, defense spokesperson for the Liberal Democrats, called for all-party negotiations to agree on a path forward to 3% of GDP.
"Whilst the prime minister is totally right to recognize the importance of increasing our defense capabilities -- without a clear spending plan -- the SDR risks becoming a damp squib," she said.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says fresh US-China trade talks in London next week
US President Donald Trump announced Friday a new round of trade talks with China in London next week, a day after calling Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping in a bid to end a bitter battle over tariffs. The talks in the British capital on Monday will mark the second round of such negotiations between the world's two biggest economies since Trump launched his trade war this year. "The meeting should go very well," said Trump in a post on his Truth Social platform. The president added that US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and US Trade Representative Jamieson Greer would meet the Chinese team. The first talks between Washington and Beijing since Trump slapped levies on allies and adversaries alike took place in Geneva last month. While Trump had imposed a sweeping 10 percent duty on imports from most trading partners, rates on Chinese goods rocketed as both countries engaged in an escalating tariffs battle. In April, additional US tariffs on many Chinese products hit 145 percent while China hit back with countermeasures of 125 percent. Following the talks last month, both sides agreed to temporarily bring down the levels, with US tariffs cooling to 30 percent and China's levies at 10 percent. But this temporary halt is expected to expire in early August and Trump last week accused China of violating the pact, underscoring deeper differences on both sides. US officials have accused China of slow-walking export approvals of critical minerals and rare earth magnets, a key issue behind Trump's recent remarks. While Trump's long-awaited phone call with Xi this week likely paved the way for further high-level trade talks, a swift resolution to the tariffs impasse remains uncertain. dk-bys/acb
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What Washington can learn from a legendary London meltdown
In a city where allegiance and proximity to power is everything, the leader's closest adviser portrayed himself as an outsider. He began the year by hiring a bunch of 'weirdos and misfits' and ordering them to rip up the entire 'rotten' system of government. The adviser loved to put noses out of joint and 'own the libs,' while building up his profile in the media as the real power behind the throne. Then, having realized that his easily-distracted and impulsive politician boss wasn't actually committed to building a tech-heavy, libertarian future, the disillusioned adviser quit — dedicating himself to publicly destroying his former employer. If you're British, watching the collapse of Donald Trump and Elon Musk's uncomfortable marriage has echoes of the end of the relationship between Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Chief Adviser Dominic Cummings in 2020. How that psychodrama played out in the UK could have lessons for the US — not least because Cummings eventually succeeded in undermining Johnson's political career, ultimately defenestrating the prime minister through relentless briefings and leaks. When someone who was inside the room and was perceived to be central to a political project says it's all a sham, the damage can be significant. For those who don't know, Cummings was the chief strategist of the successful Brexit campaign in 2016 but then largely disappeared from view when it came to actually defining what Brexit should look like. Unlike Musk, Cummings was a lifelong political operative, albeit one who cultivated a reputation for actually reading books. Three years later, with his political standing inflated by a film in which he was portrayed by Benedict Cumberbatch as an insane genius, Cummings returned to maneuver Johnson into Downing Street. Once inside government, Cummings broke all the standard operating procedures of the British state to finally 'get Brexit done' and sever the UK's relationship with the EU in January 2020. When I look back at my occasional text exchanges with Cummings from that era, usually while trying to check stories about the funding of the Brexit campaign or his desire to defund the BBC, they mirror what he said in public. He held a seemingly sincere belief that most of the British media was fake news, that the British state was not fit for purpose, and that the political party he was nominally working for, the Conservatives, was little more than a helpful vehicle for an insurrection. One ally approvingly described the chief of staff of a Conservative government to the BBC as a 'Leninist.' Ultimately, both Musk and Cummings believed that you can run the government as a high-performance start-up and that the defining failure of past civil service reforms was that they hadn't smashed enough things quickly enough. Both also have the fatal flaws of being undisciplined, delighting in picking public fights and getting bored easily. Their independent means also meant they were not as beholden to their political masters as other advisers. Cummings might not have Musk levels of money but he was wealthy in British terms (his father-in-law Sir Humphry Tyrrell Wakefield, owner of a 13th century castle, would write letters in support of his proto-DOGE policies) and connected (his wife was deputy editor of the right-wing Spectator magazine). The overwhelming impression Cummings gave was that politicians were the useful idiots who should give him the runway to remake the state. Iconoclasm was the point. When Cummings quit he took to publishing lengthy Substack posts portraying Johnson as a broken supermarket 'trolley' who veered all over the place based on the last thing someone said to him. Even more effectively, Cummings helped to leak stories about Johnson's pandemic lockdown-busting in a scandal known as Partygate. In an echo of what's happened with Musk, left-wingers who previously thought Cummings was the devil incarnate began cheering him on as he stuck the knife into Johnson. The attacks rang true among Tory MPs and Johnson's ratings never recovered, ultimately leading to his early departure from politics. Many people leaked against Johnson and his circle, but when Cummings did, the pair's previous closeness gave it the ring of truth. Musk and Cummings got opportunities because they went in to bat for fundamentally untrustworthy but opportunistic politicians, in the hope that they would be given the freedom to enact policies with limited scrutiny. The two men have even exchanged notes and acknowledged the similarity of their programs. Ultimately, these were political shotgun marriages — the very thing that made the attachments so powerful at a particular moment in time was ultimately their undoing: In each case, the leader learned that there was no real love there. As Cummings and Musk found, if you hitch yourself to an anti-establishment hero who eschews patronage and loyalty then it's only a matter of time before you find yourself the target. There is a case that a less bellicose, less in-your-face flavour of DOGE could work better — and that such changes are easier when they're not associated with a controversial figure. In the UK, Prime Minister Keir Starmer's Labour government, elected last year, is pinning its hopes on widespread use of AI technology to improve productivity, for person. And there are even people in Downing Street who quite envies the idea of taking a Musk-style wrecking ball to parts of the state; Health Secretary Wes Streeting recently abolished one of the main administrative levels of the National Health Service in an overnight raid. Attempts by the insurgent, right-wing populist Reform party — headed by Nigel Farage, who has courted Musk's funds — to launch a 'British DOGE' and find excess spending in local government have hit the rocks. Announced on Monday, the program's first leader had quit by Thursday. Cummings said in November that he was hopeful Musk could make the US government operate like Silicon Valley. Cummings was long on diagnosis but short on prescription, the London-based Institute for Government think tank wrote in November 2021. It sought to fill the gap with ideas of its own for civil service reform.
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
D.C. police officer gets 18 months in prison for leaks to Proud Boys leader
June 6 (UPI) -- Former Washington, D.C., Police Intelligence Chief Lt. Shane Lamond got 18 months in a federal prison Friday for obstructing an investigation by lying regarding contact he had with Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio. Lamond leaked information to Tarrio that he was being investigated and then lied about doing that, according to prosecutors. Lamond was convicted of one count of obstructing justice and three counts of making false statements to federal law enforcement. Judge Amy B. Jackson said Lamond showed no real contrition for his actions. "The entire attitude throughout has been, 'How dare they bring these charges!," Jackson said. Lamond attorney Mark Schamel urged Judge Jackson to not incarcerate Lamond. He told the judge he fundamentally disagrees with her about the facts in the case. He said Lamond's destroyed police career should be enough punishment. The investigation into Lamond's communication with Tarrio revealed hundreds of message exchanges that included encrypted Telegram messages. Lamond contended they were intended to gather intelligence on extremist groups. Tarrio was pardoned for his federal conviction by President Donald Trump, who also pardoned hundreds of other people convicted in connection with the violent pro-Trump attack on the U.S. Capitol Jan. 6, 2021. Tarrio was sentenced to 22 years in prison for seditious conspiracy, but Trump freed him with a presidential pardon. Tarrio testified for Lamond and urged Trump to pardon the D.C. police officer. When Lamond was convicted in December 2024, U.S. Attorney Matthew Graves said in a statement, "As proven at trial, Lamond turned his job on its head-providing confidential information to a source, rather than getting information from him-lied about the conduct, and obstructed an investigation into the source."