UK preparing for war
Britain is going on a war footing with the launch of a major rearmament campaign, Prime Minister Keir Starmer said in a keynote address on Monday.
Starmer unveiled his cabinet's Strategic Defense Review, which includes an expansive armaments program mirroring similar efforts across NATO. Last week, UK Defense Secretary John Healey said London was sending 'a message to Moscow' by allocating billions of pounds for new munitions plants, long-range missile systems, and other capabilities. Russia has accused Western nations of using alarmist rhetoric to justify shifting public funds toward military spending.
'We are moving to war-fighting readiness,' Starmer said at a shipyard in Govan, Glasgow, adding that 'our defense policy will always be NATO first.' He vowed to transform the UK into 'a battle-ready, armor-clad nation with the strongest alliances and the most advanced capabilities equipped for the decades to come.'
According to Starmer, the overhaul will enable Britain to make its 'biggest contribution to NATO since its creation.' He also pledged that the country would become 'the fastest innovator in NATO,' with defense research operating at a 'wartime pace.' The reforms are expected to make the British military 'ten times more lethal by 2035,' he claimed.
The prime minister reaffirmed his government's goal to increase defense spending to 3% of GDP. He framed the effort as replacing the post-Cold War 'peace dividend' with a 'defense dividend' through the creation of thousands of new jobs in weapons manufacturing, including production of nuclear arms.
Starmer blamed Moscow for what he called a series of provocations, accusing Russia of 'menacing' the UK, demonstrating 'aggression' in British waters, and 'driving up the cost of living here at home,' harming British workers.
Russian lawmaker Aleksey Pushkov has accused the UK of planning an 'ice war' with Russia, noting that 'there is no difference between the Labour Party and the Conservative Party' in their attitude.
Commenting on Starmer's pledge to build additional nuclear submarines, Pushkov asserted that no British investments could bring the country to an equal footing with Russia, the US, and China. However, 'Starmer needs them [those boats] to report his achievements' to domestic and international players who stand to benefit financially from the project, Pushkov claimed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
2 hours ago
- Russia Today
NATO summit to avoid Ukraine membership issue
NATO leaders convening for a key summit this month will deliberately avoid discussing membership for Ukraine, AFP reported on Wednesday, citing sources. The bloc's members are reportedly wary of raising the issue due to fears it could exacerbate tensions between the EU and US. Members of the US-led military bloc are highly likely to 'steer clear of its previous strong statements that Ukraine is on course to join the alliance' when the summit takes place in The Hague in late June, the agency said. One diplomatic source told AFP that the final declaration is expected to omit any mention of Ukrainian membership to maintain unity among member states. 'There will be nothing on that,' a NATO diplomat said. 'My expectation is we will be absolutely silent.' US President Donald Trump has expressed firm opposition to Ukraine's bid to join NATO. In February, he suggested that Ukraine 'can forget about NATO,' adding that Kiev's bid was 'probably the reason the whole thing started,' referring to the conflict with Russia. Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky is still expected to be present at the summit, but any formal talks between the bloc and Kiev are unlikely, AFP said. 'It will be a PR disaster if he's not there,' another diplomat told the agency. While NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte has insisted that Ukraine remains a priority issue at the summit, AFP sources have painted a different picture. They suggested that the overwhelming emphasis will be on trying to satisfy Trump's demands that member states drastically ramp up their defense spending. It 'is the most important part and no one wants to jeopardize that,' the agency's source said. Russia has stated that NATO membership for Ukraine is a red line and one of the key reasons for the conflict, insisting that Ukraine adopt a neutral status as a key condition for a lasting peace. While Trump administration officials have described NATO membership as 'a bridge too far,' Kiev has refused to commit to neutrality or to refraining from hosting foreign troops on its soil, which Moscow also considers to be a red line.
Russia Today
3 hours ago
- Russia Today
Bad peace or no state at all? What this NATO-torn state is facing years after its leader's murder
Libya has endured a collapse unmatched in modern North Africa since the United Nations Security Council passed Resolution 1973 in March 2011 – endorsing international intervention during the uprising against Muammar Gaddafi. Fourteen years on, the country remains fractured, chaotic, and stuck in an open-ended 'transitional period' that never seems to end. NATO's seven-month, round-the-clock bombardment of the country, under the pretext of protecting civilians, left Libya in tatters. So far, the UN has dispatched ten special envoys, passed 44 resolutions, convened multiple peace conferences, and spent hundreds of millions of dollars. All UNSC resolutions adopted under the UN Charter's Chapter VII, which makes them binding to member states, have not, however, been implemented effectively on the ground. Libya remains a cautionary tale: Two rival governments, a patchwork of militias, foreign interference at every level, and no real path to a functioning, unified state. Despite repeated pledges to guide the country toward elections for a parliament, president, and unified government, every major initiative has failed since the last elections in 2014. The UN Support Mission in Libya (UNSMIL) now stands accused of not resolving the crisis – but managing it instead. Critics argue that the mission has become a diplomatic holding pattern, one that accommodates obstructionists instead of sidelining them. Nothing illustrates the UN's ongoing failure better as the recent eruption of violence in Tripoli. On May 12, two powerful government-loyal militias clashed in a two-day battle that left over 100 civilian casualties and at least eight deaths. Burned-out cars and rubble littered the streets of the capital. It was triggered by the assassination of Abdel Ghani al-Kikli, known as 'Gheniwa', at the hands of the rival 444 Brigade. Gheniwa, who led the Stability Support Apparatus (SSA), was ambushed during what was supposed to be a mediation meeting. Both the SSA and 444 Brigade were created by former Prime Minister Fayez el-Sarraj by separate decrees. The SSA's tasks included protecting government buildings, providing personal protection to government officials, and controlling public discontent. The 444 Brigade was intended to be more of a disciplined combat-army unit headed by Colonel Mahmoud Hamza – a professional military officer. It originated as a small unit within a larger militia known as the Special Deterrence Force. Gheniwa, however, was more than just a militia commander: He had practically been running a parallel state, extending his influence across Libya's security apparatus, central bank, foreign ministry, and southern Tripoli's governance. The UN condemned the fighting, as it always does, and called for calm, but had little else to offer. The mayhem underscored what many Libyans already knew: Tripoli is not safer without Gheniwa and the state does not control the armed militias. This has been the case since NATO's 2011 intervention which, effectively, paralyzed the Libyan state, and now the UN has lost its grip on the peace process. From Abdel Elah al-Khatib in 2011 to Abdoulaye Bathily in 2024, every UN envoy has exited the Libyan stage with their mission unfulfilled. Some made bold moves. Bernardino Leon brokered the 2015 Skhirat Agreement, which became a de facto constitution in a country that still does not have one. The agreement is the official UN-sanctioned frame of reference for every political effort the UNSMIL attempts. Ghassan Salame, who took over five years after Leon, led the 2020 Berlin Process, further strengthening Leon's work and delivering the road map that led to the formation of the current Government of National Unity (GNU) still in office today. But each road map eventually hit a dead end: Local actors resisted compromise, foreign players pushed their own agendas, and the interim authorities hoarded power. Bathily, a Senegalese diplomat, abruptly resigned in April 2024 after a proposal by the High Steering Committee to agree on a road map for the country was rejected by almost all rival groups and political entities in the country, including the House of Representatives in Tobruk and the High State Council (HSC) in Tripoli. His resignation letter was scathing, citing 'a lack of political will and good faith' among Libyan leaders and warning that foreign interference had turned Libya into a 'playground for fierce rivalry among regional and international actors.' His exit left the UN with a credibility problem. Now the UN is turning to Ghanaian diplomat Hannah Tetteh – the former head of the UN Office to the African Union – in what some see as a pivot toward African-led legitimacy. Critics of past efforts have long argued that Libya's future should not be steered solely by European or Gulf powers. Tetteh faces daunting odds. Before her appointment, acting UN envoy Stephanie Koury laid some groundwork by establishing a 20-member Libyan Advisory Committee. On May 20, the committee delivered a report outlining four possible political paths: 1) hold both legislative and presidential elections, then proceed to a constitutional referendum; 2) begin with legislative elections, followed by a referendum to adopt a permanent constitution, then presidential elections; 3) reverse the process: Adopt a constitution first, then hold elections; 4) reset entirely, launching a new national dialogue and road map through consensus. Any of these tracks requires buy-in from what Libyan observers call 'the Five Devils' – the key domestic spoilers: Aguila Saleh, speaker of the House of Representatives in Tobruk; Khaled al-Mishri, the head of the HSC in Tripoli; Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar and his forces in the east; Prime Minister Abdul Hamid Dbeibah and the Government of National Unity; the three-member Presidential Council in Tripoli. Bathily tried to convene these actors in one room. It never happened. And that failure, more than any policy misstep, sealed his fate. The international community often calls these actors 'stakeholders'. In truth, they are gatekeepers of chaos. Elections threaten their entrenched power and access to state wealth. The longer the delay, the more they benefit. Many of these factions now function as proxies for foreign powers. Egypt, Turkey, France, Russia, the US, and to a lesser extent, Qatar, all back different sides. Their interests rarely align with the democratic aspirations of ordinary Libyans. Domestic leaders, meanwhile, speak the language of peace in public while obstructing it behind closed doors. Dbeibah's GNU has publicly welcomed elections – while allegedly using state funds to sponsor rallies, suppress dissent, fund nominally allied militias, and sabotage electoral logistics. Last month, the Tobruk based parliament invited 14 men to present their manifestos to become the new prime minister of the unified government in Libya. But the chamber appears hesitant, fearing that the new government will not be recognized by the UN, as it will not be able to peacefully dislodge Dbeibah's GNU from the center of power in the capital, Tripoli. This scenario is likely to lead to violence in Tripoli and perhaps other parts of the divided country. The UNSMIL has not commented on the parliamentary discussions yet, but behind the scenes, it does not support this step, fearing the consequences and potential destabilizing effects. Critics argue that the UN mission has shifted from seeking resolution to managing stagnation. The mantra of a 'Libyan-led solution' has become, in effect, an excuse for inaction. By refusing to confront spoilers head-on, the mission risks legitimizing the very elites blocking progress. One Libyan analyst, speaking anonymously, described the UNSMIL as 'a concierge service for the crisis' – hosting endless forums and communiques, while average citizens endure poverty, sky-high cost of living, inflation, and collapsing services. Basic institutions – a unified military, functioning judiciary, and national budget – remain aspirational. And then, like clockwork, violence erupts in Tripoli. If Tetteh's mission stalls like the rest, what is the UN's plan B? There is no formal fallback, but diplomats are quietly discussing three controversial options: The Bosnia option remains deeply divisive. But as one Tripoli-based European diplomat speaking on condition of anonymity put it, 'Better a bad peace than no state at all.' Libya is no longer just a post-Arab Spring tragedy – it is a credibility test for multilateral diplomacy. Fourteen years of broken deadlines, shelved blueprints, and failed elections have disillusioned not only Libyans but the international community. Hannah Tetteh's task is to do what nine others could not: Disrupt elite collusion, overcome foreign manipulation, and make elections more than just lines in a Geneva communique. Her success or failure will shape not just Libya's future – but the legacy of the UN's longest-running post-conflict mission since Iraq.
Russia Today
4 hours ago
- Russia Today
UK pledges 100,000 new drones for Kiev
The UK has pledged to supply 100,000 new drones to Ukraine by April 2026, in addition to the 10,000 UAVs it sent last year. The announcement coincides with Britain's newly unveiled Strategic Defense Review, which proposes steps to rearm its military in light of what it paints as a threat posed by Russia. London has allocated £350 million ($470 million) from its £4.5 billion Ukraine military package to fund new drone deliveries to Kiev, according to a government statement on Wednesday. UK Defense Secretary John Healey is expected to detail the initiative at the upcoming Ukraine contact group meeting in Brussels. 'Ukraine's Armed Forces have demonstrated the effectiveness of drone warfare,' London stated, admitting that Kiev's demand for UAVs has provided a boost to the UK's economy. It also unveiled plans to use Ukraine's drone experience to train its own military. In order to 'learn the lessons from Ukraine,' the UK would allocate over £4 billion for autonomous systems and drones for its armed forces. Ukraine has carried out drone attacks, including against civilian sites in Russia, since the escalation of the conflict in February 2022. The attacks have intensified since the renewal of peace talks between Moscow and Kiev in Istanbul. Russia has claimed that Kiev's Western backers, particularly the UK, France, and Germany, are pushing drone warfare in order to derail the talks and to serve their own political agendas. London framed its new Strategic Defense Review as 'a message to Moscow,' declaring Britain is 'ready to fight, if required.' The UK intends to spend £1.5 billion on new weapons plants, £6 billion on long-range arms, and £15 billion on nuclear warheads, among multiple other new expenses. Russia has repeatedly dismissed claims it plans to attack Western Europe as 'nonsense,' accusing the West of using scare tactics to justify shifting public funds toward military spending. Moscow has warned that foreign involvement, including arms deliveries, would obstruct peace efforts and ultimately fail to stop Russia from reaching its military goals. Moscow has also criticized the UK's and EU's respective militarization drives, warning they risk triggering a broader conflict in Europe.
