Welfare demands put pressure on Starmer's commitment to defense overhaul

Japan Times

3 days ago

A revamp of defense policy by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer intended to show both U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin that the U.K. is serious about maintaining its role as a key power in Europe and NATO.
But Starmer's failure to explain how and when he'll find billions of pounds of extra spending to pay for the new weapons and personnel has left him facing doubts about the U.K.'s commitment to follow through.
The plans must also survive rising pressure from Labour lawmakers, who want to prioritize domestic issues blowing back on the left-leaning party at the ballot box, such as controversial benefit cuts.
The U.K. government on Monday released a long-awaited blueprint to move the country's depleted military to a position of "war-fighting readiness.' Among other things, the Strategic Defense Review called for building as many as a dozen new attack submarines as part of the AUKUS partnership with Australia and the U.S., investing £15 billion ($20 billion) in nuclear warhead development and expanding domestic production of drones, munitions and long-range missiles.
Still, Starmer has repeatedly sidestepped questions about when he'll firm up his "ambition' to expand defense spending to 3% of economic output in the next parliament, compared with 2.3% now and a planned 2.5% in two years' time. That risks undermining U.K. leadership on European security issues, with NATO leaders expecting to commit later this month at the Hague to an expenditure target of 3.5% to appease Trump's demands on the alliance.
"The key question remains: what's the planned pathway from 2.5% in 2027 to 3% in 2034, itself short of a likely new NATO target?' said John Foreman, former U.K. defense attache to Moscow and Kyiv. "Without that, any plans are worthless.'
Starmer is vying to reverse decades of decline in the British military as Whitehall policymakers directed resources toward health and social programs while enjoying the protection of the U.S. nuclear umbrella. The U.K.'s inability to credibly defend its interests at home and abroad led then-Defense Secretary Ben Wallace, a Conservative, to declare that the military had been "hollowed out' since the end of the Cold War.
The last defense review — drafted under former Prime Minister Boris Johnson in 2021 — was more focused on force projection and naval power, with a shift toward the Indo-Pacific. Putin's full-scale invasion of Ukraine and Trump's return to power upended those plans, forcing the U.K. to turn its attention to security concerns closer to home.
Since taking power last year, Starmer has sought to put the U.K. at the heart of European security, helping forge a "coalition of the willing' of nations supporting Ukraine and striking a defense pact with Brussels. For the Labour leader, who opposed leaving the EU, it was a chance to reassert British leadership on the continent without relitigating Brexit.
"The threat we now face is more serious, more immediate and more unpredictable than at any time since the Cold War,' Starmer told workers Monday at BAE Systems's Govan shipyard in Glasgow. "A new era in the threats we face demands a new era for defense and security, not just to survive in this new world, but to lead.'
Yet military experts warned that the prime minister's lofty aims contrast with what he has been willing to commit to spending on defense, and look in danger of appearing out of pace when compared to commitments being made by other NATO members.
NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte is pushing for members to pledge to spend 3.5% of gross domestic product on core defense activities by 2032, with another 1.5% going toward adjacent projects such as cybersecurity and border control. That's an effort to assuage Trump, who has called on NATO countries to spend 5% of GDP — a goal the U.S. itself doesn't meet.
Asked for a clearer statement about when his 3% spending goal would be met, the prime minister declined to give what he called an "arbitrary date,' insisting he would only set out plans for further spending once the economic and fiscal situation allowed.
The lack of clarity prompted criticism from left and right, including the now-opposition Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. Starmer will be expected to provide answers to NATO leaders when he attends the organization's summit in the Netherlands.
While the prime minister has so far avoided the sort of criticism that Trump has directed at other allies about their security commitments, it remains to be seen how the U.S. leader will respond to the U.K.'s spending plans.
There was at least one potential boost for U.K.-U.S. relations in Monday's announcement: Britain indicated it would consider buying F-35A fighter jets capable of firing tactical nuclear weapons, made by Lockheed Martin Corp.
The international context was laid out at a meeting of eastern European and Nordic leaders in Vilnius on Monday, where Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen suggested that NATO's target for 3.5% of core defense spending should be brought forward to sooner than 2032. Former Defense Secretary Grant Shapps similarly said Starmer should commit to spending 3% of GDP on defense by 2030 to ensure the U.K. maintains its position at the fore of NATO.
"That figure isn't decorative — it's the entry ticket for modern kit, a resilient industrial base and credibility with our allies. Anything less is theater,' said Shapps, a Conservative who left office last year. "Moscow can spot the difference between a slogan and steel.'
Starmer's backers argue that he has already proved his intent by lifting projected defense spending earlier this year, and accuse his Tory predecessors of handing him a poisoned inheritance including a threadbare military and overstretched public finances.
Ultimately, Starmer has decided where government expenditure should be focused — choices that are in the spotlight again at next week's spending review.
With the Labour government struggling for popularity less than a year into power, and Nigel Farage's right-wing Reform U.K. party surging in the polls, the party's lawmakers have already forced a reversal on a plan to cut cold weather payments for pensioners and are pushing for him to increase benefits for parents.
Simultaneous calls from international allies to raise defense spending and from Labour lawmakers to raise welfare spending pose an obvious challenge for Starmer's under-pressure Chancellor of the Exchequer, Rachel Reeves. She may soon be forced to decided whether to bow to demands from within her party to loosen her fiscal rules or compromise on Labour's campaign pledges not to raise broad-based taxes.
Paul Johnson, director of the Institute of Fiscal Studies think tank, told Times Radio that he expected "some really quite chunky tax increases.' That, Johnson said, is "the only choice that is available.'