Donald Trump 'pushes UK to pump billions of pounds more into defence spending' and reach 3% 'ambition' years earlier than PM had planned
Donald Trump is reportedly pushing Britain to boost defence spending by billions of pounds over the coming years to set an example to other European nations.
The US President is said to want the UK to increase its military budget to 3 per cent of GDP by 2029, which is years earlier than Sir Keir Starmer had been planning.
In February, following Mr Trump's return to the White House, the Prime Minister pledged to increase defence spending to 2.5 per cent of GDP from 2027.
Sir Keir also set an 'ambition' to spend 3 per cent of GDP on the country's Armed Forces in the next parliament, as economic conditions allow.
But, according to The Times, Pentagon chiefs have made it known that Mr Trump would be 'happier' if the UK reached 3 per cent by the end of this parliament in 2029.
A senior US official told the newspaper that Mr Trump's administration does not believe the UK's current planned increase in defence spending goes far enough.
America has 'sought the potential' for reaching the higher figure in the present parliament, the official added.
The Office for Budget Responsibility has estimated that boosting defence spending to 3 per cent of GDP by the next parliament would cost an extra £17.3billion in 2029/30.
In 2024/25, UK defence spending was around 2.3 per cent of GDP. The Government has forecast it will be spending an extra £6.4billion in 2027 to reach 2.5 per cent.
A Whitehall source said, while some members of the US government had raised the prospect of Britain reaching 3 per cent in this parliament, others were asking if the UK could go even higher in the longer term.
The source added there was not a 'consistent' view across the US administration and Mr Trump 'hasn't given his final expectations'.
The US President has previously demanded that NATO allies hike their defence spending to 5 per cent of GDP.
Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, there has been a marked increase in the number of NATO countries meeting the current 2 per cent target.
But, last year, none of them - including the US - spent five per cent of GDP on defence.
Poland was the biggest spender at 4.12 per cent of GDP, followed by Estonia (3.43 per cent), the US (3.38 per cent), and Latvia (3.15 per cent).
A Ministry of Defence spokeswoman said: 'This Government is delivering for defence.
'We have announced the biggest sustained increase in defence spending since the end of the Cold War.
'This investment will make Britain stronger and safer in an insecure world and will help us build a modern and resilient armed forces, with cutting-edge capabilities.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Economist
44 minutes ago
- Economist
Trump is urged to go 'all in' on crushing Iran
'WE REMAIN COMMITTED to a Diplomatic Resolution to the Iran Nuclear Issue!' declared Donald Trump on June 12th. Within hours Israel attacked Iran. That conflict continues to escalate relentlessly. Iran has just hit Israel's cities with waves of ballistic-missile and drone strikes. Meanwhile Israeli warplanes have targeted Tehran's air-defence systems for a second night. Israel has now struck Iranian nuclear facilities at Fordow and Isfahan, claiming to have inflicted 'significant damage'; more attacks may come. America's forces are already helping to defend Israel against missile attacks. The big question now is whether Mr Trump is drawn in deeper. That is what some Republicans are urging. On June 13th Senator Lindsey Graham said if diplomacy failed, he 'strongly' believed it was in America's national security interest to 'go all-in to help Israel finish the job'.
The Independent
an hour ago
- The Independent
Protests, parades and Pride: One week in June 2025 is drawing stark American fault lines
On the first weekend: a vision of the nation built upon inclusivity and the tenets of liberalism — a conception of country that incorporates generations of fights for equity, for compassion, for expanding what it means to be an American. On the second weekend, in the same town: a public show of strength and nationalism constructed on a foundation of military might, law and order, a tour de force of force. And on the days in between: a city 2,000 miles from the capital locked in pitched battles over the use — abuse, many contend — of federal power and military authority to root out, detain and oust people who the current administration says do not belong. Today's United States — its possibility, its strength, its divisiveness, its polarization and fragmentation — is encapsulated in a single week in June 2025, its triumphs and frictions on vivid display. As events both planned and chaotically spontaneous play out, many Americans are frantically and sometimes furiously pondering assorted iterations of two questions: What is this country right now? And what should it be? Pride, protests and parades Consider two quotes from recent days from two very different Americans. The first came last weekend, during World Pride in Washington, when a 58-year-old gay man from Philadelphia named David Begler summed up what many were messaging in the days leading up to it after months of Donald Trump 's increasing attempts to target the LGBTQ community: "I want us to send a message to the White House to focus on uplifting each other instead of dividing.' The second came days ahead of the military parade planned Saturday for the U.S. Army's 250th anniversary, from the mouth of the president on whose 79th birthday it will be held: 'If there's any protester that wants to come out, they will be met with very big force,' Donald Trump said. 'I haven't even heard about a protest, but you know, this is people that hate our country, but they will be met with very heavy force.' Among the competing visions of America in 2025: the desire to protest and seek a redress of grievances against the government vs. the desire for control, order — and a respect for the government and for authority. The volatile combination of demonstrations and the U.S. military is a potent one, with its most recent roots in the protest movement of the 1960s against the Vietnam War. A young generation that would later be known as baby boomers regularly squared off against police and sometimes the military over U.S. involvement in what was framed as a war against communism in Southeast Asia. Historians give those protesters a fair bit of the credit for that war ultimately ending in 1975. President Jimmy Carter ultimately pardoned more than 200,000 people who had dodged the draft for that conflict. Then, as now, many in the establishment criticized protesters bitterly, saying they were undermining a nation to which they should be grateful. Questions of loyalty and betrayal were thrown around. The role of the military in quelling civilian protests was bitterly contested, particularly after Ohio National Guardsmen opened fire and killed four students during antiwar protests in May 1970 at Kent State University. There are echoes of that this week, not only in Los Angeles but now in Texas, where Gov. Greg Abbott ordered the deployment of 5,000 state National Guard troops ahead of the 'No Kings Day of Defiance' against the Trump administration's ongoing immigration raids. And as protesters in Los Angeles taunt the military and say guardsmen should be 'ashamed' to face off against what they call a just cause, it's easy to wonder: How can patriotism and protest coexist? Washington at the epicenter Democracy has always been messy and resistant to consensus. That's part of why the national slogan of the United States is 'e pluribus unum' — 'out of many, one.' And Washington, D.C., as the nation's capital, has long been the place where the many have come to make themselves known as part of the one — and to be noticed. It was where the 'Bonus Army" of World War I veterans marched in 1932 to demand their promised postwar payments and be heard in a demonstration that ended violently. It was where the first National Boy Scout Jamboree was held on the National Mall in 1937. It was where the 'March on Washington,' a centerpiece of the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, ended with the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s renowned 'I Have a Dream' speech. It was where, in 1995, the 'Million Man March' was held to address concerns of the American Black community, and where hundreds of thousands of women came to Washington largely in protest of Trump, just a day after his first inauguration. It is also the place where Americans remember, where the memorials to World War II, the Korean War and the Vietnam War sit. It is where the country erected stone shrines in various shapes and sizes to the presidents it most admired — Washington, Jefferson, Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt. It is the site of museums containing some of the most distilled expressions of culture — from the Holocaust Museum to the Smithsonian Air and Space Museum to the National Museum of African American History. Is it so hard to believe, then, that two events as opposite as World Pride and a military parade unfold here, within blocks of each other, within a week's time? At a politically fractious moment when some families can hardly break bread without political arguments erupting over Trump, Gaza and Israel, immigration and LGBTQ rights, isn't it possible that the weird and downright uncomfortable juxtaposition of these two starkly different events might be the most American thing of all? Walt Whitman, one of the most famous poets in American history, had this to say about the the diversity of America when he wrote 'I Hear America Singing' to underscore that its citizens all contribute to the nation's song: 'I am large. I contain multitudes.' And in one week in June, at a time when the fate of the United States is being discussed in every direction we turn, the capital of Whitman's nation has become a showcase in displaying those messy democratic multitudes to the world. For better or for worse. ___
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Man Utd's new £65m-rated striker transfer target revealed after Viktor Gyokeres ‘REJECTS Old Trafford transfer'
MANCHESTER UNITED have a new striker target after being rejected by Viktor Gyokeres. The Sporting star was United's No1 priority this summer but the deal is dead following talks this week. 2 Gyokeres was not happy with the Red Devils' offer and now wants to move to Arsenal instead. United are still in need of a striker and will now turn their attention to Victor Osimhen. The in-demand striker scored 32 goals in 37 games on loan at Galatasaray last season, and the Turkish side are keen to make his stay permanent. So far, though, no deal has been agreed, with Osimhen seemingly ready to consider all his options - including a potential move to the Premier League. Saudi Arabian clubs are interested and would be able to afford his £500,000-a-week wage demands. That could prove a stumbling bloke for United however, and player sales would have to happen to get a deal for Osimhen over the line. It is understood the Nigerian could be available for £65million. And he was said to be open to a move to Old Trafford. United are also in danger of missing out on another top target - Bryan Mbeumo. The winger was said to have decided on moving to United but that was before Tottenham appointed Thomas Frank. Spurs have held initial talks with Brentford and could hijack United's £60m move for the Cameroonian.
