Latest news with #warfare
Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Business
- Daily Mail
Crucial defence review warns Britain's Armed Forces aren't ready to fight a war against a foe with similar capabilities in stark assessment of UK's military prowess
Britain's Armed Forces aren't ready to fight a war against a military with similar capabilities, the authors of Britain's Strategic Defence Review have warned. In a stark assessment, the report said that our forces are better suited 'to a peacetime era' and are 'not currently optimised for warfare against a 'peer' military state'. The externally-led Strategic Defence Review (SDR), written by former Nato secretary general Lord Robertson, retired general Sir Richard Barrons and Russia expert Fiona Hill, was described as the most profound change to defence in 150 years. While it leaned heavily into new technologies, it has also recommended an increase in the size of the regular Army from 73,000 to 76,000 in the next Parliament. This follows decades of the Army shrinking from 156,000 at the end of the Cold War. The review also includes a chilling list of the potential effects of conflict on the UK's way of life and lays bare Britain's overseas dependencies and threats. In the event of war, Britain would be subject to attacks on its military bases at home and abroad, long-range drone and cruise missile sorties, cyber-attacks crippling national infrastructure and disruptions to economic interests and international trade routes. The SDR states that the defence medical services couldn't cope with a mass casualty event and that the military is suffering from a recruitment crisis which means only a small number of troops could be deployed. The document added: 'The UK is entering a new era of threat and challenge. The West's long-held military advantage is being eroded as other countries modernise and expand their armed forces at speed.' Eurofighter Typhoon jets from the UK's Royal Air Force land at Murted Air Base in Ankara for inspection by Turkish officials on December 18, 2024 The report also reveals that 95 per cent of the UK's data is carried by undersea cables that are vulnerable to attack and that the UK relies on imports for 46 per cent of its food. It stated: 'Undersea pipelines and data cables are critical for sustaining daily national life. The maritime domain is increasingly vulnerable. The Royal Navy must be prepared to deter maritime incidents similar to the sabotage of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline and the cutting of undersea data cables in UK and international waters.' In the year to September 2024, the UK suffered 89 nationally significant cyber-attacks. The Navy and RAF conducted 374 escorts of Russian Federation vessels between 2020 and 2024. In that same period there were 32 launches of RAF Typhoon Quick Reaction Alert aircraft. The report added: 'Defence must prepare for a much more difficult world of heightened competition, more frequent crises and conflict that sees conventional military attacks combined with intensified sub-threshold aggression. 'The UK is already subject to daily sub-threshold attack, targeting its critical national infrastructure, testing its vulnerabilities as an open economy and global trading nation and challenges its social cohesion. 'Changes in the strategic context mean that UK defence must plan on the basis that Nato allies may be drawn into war with – or be subject to coercion by – another nuclear-armed state.' The SDR will bring about a transformation of the Armed Forces, including the development of a so-called Integrated Force, a coming together of the separate services. Eurofighter Typhoon jet from the UK's Royal Air Force lands at Murted Air Base in Ankara for inspection by Turkish officials on December 18, 2024 While defence chiefs are determined to meet the Prime Minister's challenge to become 'war ready', the SDR reveals they are also expected to make savings. The Army is expected to deliver 'a ten-fold increase in lethality' – but without a significant number of regular soldiers, although the report concedes there is a 'strong case for a small increase in regular numbers when funding allows'. The SDR suggests fewer paratroopers will be trained to jump. The report calls on the RAF to become more efficient and use civilian planes when a task 'does not require military capability'. The Royal Navy is expected to move towards a 'cheaper' fleet. Admirals are expected to use 'commercial vessels' for transportation in non-contested environments and to share logistical challenges with allies. The UK's £7 billion combined-cost aircraft carriers are expected to become more versatile, with adaptations to ensure long-range missiles can be fired from their decks and more uncrewed aircraft. Defence Secretary John Healey said: 'We must move to war-fighting readiness, to avoid the huge costs that wars create. We prevent wars by being strong enough to win them. 'We will establish a new hybrid-Navy, our carriers will carry the first hybrid airwing in Europe. We will create a British Army which is ten times more lethal, with an aim of 76,000 regular soldiers in the next parliament. 'We will also increase the number of cadets by 30 per cent and develop a new strategic reserve by 2030.'
Sky News
13 hours ago
- Business
- Sky News
AI, robots, lasers and gap years in armed forces: Key details as UK to become 'battle ready'
The UK must rebuild its military and get the whole country ready for war as the threat of conflict with a nuclear power like Russia or China is real, a major defence review warns. It described what might happen should a hostile state start a fight, saying this could include missile strikes against military sites and power stations across the UK, sabotage of railway lines and other critical infrastructure and attacks on the armed forces. 3:12 In a devastating verdict on the state of Britain's defences, the Strategic Defence Review (SDR) said today's armed forces are "not currently optimised for warfare", with inadequate stockpiles of weapons, poor recruitment and crumbling morale. "The international chessboard has been tipped over," a team of three experts that led the review wrote in a foreword to their 140-page document. "In a world where the impossible today is becoming the inevitable tomorrow, there can be no complacency about defending our country." The review, which was commissioned by Sir Keir Starmer last July, made a list of more than 60 recommendations to enable the UK to "pivot to a new way of war". They include: • Increasing the size of the army by 3,000 soldiers to 76,000 troops in the next parliament. The review also aims to boost the "lethality" of the army 10-fold, using drones and other technology. • A 20% expansion in volunteer reserve forces but, again, only when funding permits and likely not until the 2030s. • Reviving a force of tens of thousands of veterans to fight in a crisis. The government used to run annual training for the so-called Strategic Reserve in the Cold War but that no longer happens. • Embracing new technologies such as artificial intelligence, robots and lasers. The paper said the UK must develop ways to defend against emerging threats such as biological weapons, warning of "pathogens and other weapons of mass destruction". • The possibility of the UK buying warplanes that could carry American nuclear bombs to bolster the NATO alliance's nuclear capabilities. It said: "Defence should commence discussions with the United States and NATO on the potential benefits and feasibility of enhanced UK participation in NATO's nuclear mission." • The expansion of a cadet force of children by 30% and offering a "gap year" to people interested in sampling military life. • New investment in long-range weapons, submarines, munitions factories and cyber warfare capabilities. General Sir Richard Barrons, part of the review team and a former senior military officer, described the vision as "the most profound change" to UK defences in 150 years. 2:58 But there were some notable gaps - likely caused by limited finances. This includes only a brief mention of bolstering the UK's ability to defend against cruise and ballistic missiles - a key weakness but one that would be very expensive to fix. Earlier today, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said the Strategic Defence Review was a "blueprint to make Britain safer and stronger, a battle-ready armour-clad nation, with the strongest alliances and the most advanced capabilities, equipped for the decades to come". Defence Secretary John Healey, writing in a foreword to the document, said "up to" £1bn would be invested in "homeland air and missile defence" as well as the creation of a new cyber and electromagnetic warfare command. The review was drawn up with the expectation that defence spending would rise to 2.5% of GDP this parliament - up from around 2.3% now - and then to 3% by 2034. The government has pledged to hit 2.5% by 2027 but is yet to make 3% a cast iron commitment. The reviewers said their recommendations could be delivered in 10 years if that spending target is reached but they gave a strong signal that they would like this to happen much sooner. "As we live in such turbulent times it may be necessary to go faster," the team said. "The plan we have put forward can be accelerated for either greater assurance or for mobilisation of defence in a crisis." The review described the threat posed by Russia as "immediate and pressing". It said China, by contrast, is a "sophisticated and persistent challenge". It pointed to Beijing's growing missile capability that can reach the UK and said the Chinese military's nuclear arsenal is expected to double to 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030. The other two reviewers were Lord George Robertson, a former Labour defence secretary, and Fiona Hill, a Russia expert and former foreign policy adviser to Donald Trump. The review team warned the post Cold War-era of relative peace has ended and a time of contest, tension and conflict has returned. Adding to the pressure, the US - by far the most powerful member of the NATO alliance - is focusing more on the threat it sees from China. "Changes in the strategic context mean that NATO allies may be drawn into war with - or be subject to coercion by - another nuclear armed state," the review said. "With the US clear that the security of Europe is no longer its primary international focus, the UK and European allies must step up their efforts". The review set out how defence is not only the responsibility of the armed forces because countries - not just the professional military - fight wars. It said: "Everyone has a role to play and a national conversation on how we do it is required… As the old saying goes, 'If you want peace, prepare for war'." Sky News and Tortoise will launch a new podcast series on 10 June that simulates a Russian attack on the UK to test Britain's defences, with former ministers and military chiefs playing the part of the British government.
Sky News
13 hours ago
- Business
- Sky News
Starmer couldn't be clearer: Britain must prepare for war
Clement Attlee was the Labour prime minister credited with creating the welfare state. On Monday, at a shipbuilding yard in Glasgow, Sir Keir Starmer presented himself as a Labour prime minister who wants to be credited with turning the UK into a warfare-ready state, as he spoke of the need for the UK to be prepared for the possibility of war at the launch of his government's Strategic Defence Review. The rhetoric couldn't be clearer: Britain is on a wartime footing. The UK's armed forces must move to "war-fighting readiness" over the coming years, the UK faces a "more serious and immediate" threat than anytime since the Cold War, and "every citizen must play their part". The prime minister promised to fulfil the recommendations of the 10-year strategic defence plan, which will be published in full on Monday afternoon. But what he refused to do was explain when he would deliver on spending 3% of GDP on defence - the commitment necessary to deliver the recommendations in the Strategic Defence Review. 8:36 PM is sticking plasters over wounds His refusal to do so blunts his argument. On the one hand, the prime minister insists there is no greater necessity than protecting citizens, while on the other hand, he says his ability to deliver 3% of spending on defence is "subject to economic and fiscal conditions". This is a prime minister who promised an end to "sticking plaster politics", who promised to take difficult decisions in the interest of the country. One of those difficult decisions could well be deciding, if necessary, to cut other budgets in order to find the 3% needed for defence spending. Instead, the prime minister is sticking plasters over wounds. After voters lashed out at Labour in the local elections, the Starmer government announced it was going to look again at the cut to pensioners' winter fuel allowance. There is an expectation, too, that Sir Keir is planning to lift the two-child cap on benefits. Refusing to lift the cap was one of his hard choices going into the election, but now he is looking soft on it. 2:15 What choices is Starmer prepared to make? That's why I asked him on Monday what the choices are that he's going to make as prime minister. Is his choice properly-funded defence, or is it to reverse winter fuel cuts, or lift the two-child benefit cap? If he needs to be the prime minister creating the warfare state, can he also deliver what voters and his own MPs want when it comes to the welfare state? To hit the 3% target, Sir Keir would have to find an extra £13bn. That's difficult to find, and especially difficult when the government is reversing on difficult decisions its made on cuts. For now, the prime minister doesn't want to answer the question about the choices he's perhaps going to make. But if he is really clear-eyed about the security threat and what is required for the UK to become ready for war, it is question he is going to have to answer.
Sky News
14 hours ago
- Business
- Sky News
Starmer wants UK to be a warfare-ready state - but how does that balance with the welfare state?
Clement Attlee was the Labour prime minister credited with creating the welfare state. On Monday, at a shipbuilding yard in Glasgow, Sir Keir Starmer presented himself as a Labour prime minister who wants to be credited with turning the UK into a warfare-ready state, as he spoke of the need for the UK to be prepared for the possibility of war at the launch of his government's Strategic Defence Review. The rhetoric couldn't be clearer: Britain is on a wartime footing. The UK's armed forces must move to "war-fighting readiness" over the coming years, the UK faces a "more serious and immediate" threat than anytime since the Cold War, and "every citizen must play their part". The prime minister promised to fulfil the recommendations of the 10-year strategic defence plan, which will be published in full on Monday afternoon. But what he refused to do was explain when he would deliver on spending 3% of GDP on defence - the commitment necessary to deliver the recommendations in the Strategic Defence Review. 8:36 PM is sticking plasters over wounds His refusal to do so blunts his argument. On the one hand, the prime minister insists there is no greater necessity than protecting citizens, while on the other hand, he says his ability to deliver 3% of spending on defence is "subject to economic and fiscal conditions". This is a prime minister who promised an end to "sticking plaster politics", who promised to take difficult decisions in the interest of the country. One of those difficult decisions could well be deciding, if necessary, to cut other budgets in order to find the 3% needed for defence spending. Instead, the prime minister is sticking plasters over wounds. After voters lashed out at Labour in the local elections, the Starmer government announced it was going to look again at the cut to pensioners' winter fuel allowance. There is an expectation, too, that Sir Keir is planning to lift the two-child cap on benefits. Refusing to lift the cap was one of his hard choices going into the election, but now he is looking soft on it. 2:15 👉Listen to Politics at Sam and Anne's on your podcast app👈 What choices is Starmer prepared to make? That's why I asked him on Monday what the choices are that he's going to make as prime minister. Is his choice properly-funded defence, or is it to reverse winter fuel cuts, or lift the two-child benefit cap? If he needs to be the prime minister creating the warfare state, can he also deliver what voters and his own MPs want when it comes to the welfare state? To hit the 3% target, Sir Keir would have to find an extra £13bn. That's difficult to find, and especially difficult when the government is reversing on difficult decisions its made on cuts. For now, the prime minister doesn't want to answer the question about the choices he's perhaps going to make. But if he is really clear-eyed about the security threat and what is required for the UK to become ready for war, it is question he is going to have to answer.
The Independent
15 hours ago
- Business
- The Independent
Starmer's strategic defence review looks promising – until you read the small print
Publishing a strategic defence review right now is, to put it mildly, challenging. Bearing in mind that the footage that has just been released of Ukrainian kamikaze drones blowing up nearly half of Russia's irreplaceable strategic bomber fleet, thousands of kilometres away from their home bases, suggests the 'old certainties' – tanks, submarines, large platforms – may not be entirely relevant in modern warfare. Well, the answer that seems to be held in the review is the obvious one: you need both, but the balance needs to change decisively. Various commentators have talked about the British Army moving towards a 20-40-40 model: 20 per cent of the force of the army would be 'traditional' weaponry, such as tanks and artillery; 40 per cent would be the cheap-and-cheerful one-way kamikaze drones; and the remaining 40 per cent would be higher-end missiles and long-range weaponry. Would this produce a really different-looking British Army? For sure. And the signs are that as part of the review, the Royal Navy will also move to a similar type of model. Already, mine hunting has been transferring from dedicated mine hunting ships towards motherships which deploy unmanned underwater vehicles. The navy has been testing a range of uncrewed surface vessels, and the work is looking into how, in the future, a crewed warship would be accompanied by uncrewed vessels, so as to increase sea coverage, as well as effectiveness. Submarines, too, will also operate more and more uncrewed systems, to be able to detect enemy submarines much further away, and then to engage them from safer distances. And the RAF will see more uncrewed combat air vehicles, as opposed to fighters with pilots. The common view is that the manned fighter of the future will be accompanied by uncrewed fighters, and will be able to launch shorter-ranged missiles/drones. The growth of AI is fuelling the possibilities for uncrewed systems across every part of every battlefield. What might have been seen as impossible a decade ago is now either possible or will be soon. But there will never be a battlefield without fighters, on land, air, or sea – warfare is a human endeavour, and there are many things that will not be handed over to robots. The day of no human soldiers or sailors is not going to arrive any time soon… But if there is some uneasiness about what the prime minister talked about at the review reveal in Glasgow, then it was the uncertainties of the government's plan. It's still 'setting the ambition to hit 3 per cent', hedged by 'subject to economic and fiscal conditions' – far from a guarantee. The prime minister certainly might be at the receiving end of criticism about this at the late-June Nato Hague Summit. An increasing number of Nato nations are already spending more than 3 per cent of GDP (Poland is now above 4 per cent), and are looking to go even higher, so the reserved UK view of what can be spent on defence is going to look even more out of step with allies. It is possible that the PM might get ambushed by a drive to pledge to spend 3.5 per cent of GDP on defence, a figure that is being widely floated. Some might be surprised at the spending on 'non-essential' things such as the armed forces housing and infrastructure, but this would be wrong. The appalling state of accommodation is the main reason why army personnel leave – getting this right will hopefully result in more people joining, and then remaining in service for longer, the same being true of pay increases. A defence review is not just about equipment… There are several challenges. The first is speed. If the UK is to reform and reshape its forces, then this needs to be done within a few years – certainly not decades. The past 15-20 years have seen a marked deterioration of the capabilities of the UK's forces – they need to be restored, especially if the Russian threat is as persistent as is believed by many European defence departments. Which brings one to the second challenge: money. There is no point in saying, 'you'll get the required cash in 2030', or whenever – the tap needs to be turned on now to see progress. You want the six new munitions factories? If the spades are to cut soil, the money needs to come today, not next year. Those 7,000 long-range weapons? Orders today, not in several years' time, and that means money now, at a time when the UK's fiscal position is less-than-rosy. And an extra challenge: wise spending. The UK spends far more, like-for-like, than France and Italy, and gets far less at the other end. If the UK is to get real 'bang for its buck', then it needs to be even more rigorous about how it spends any extra cash. The record of reform here has, at best, been patchy historically. The UK has put off modernising its defence programmes for at least a decade, and it shows. Despite all of the evidence of the efficacy of drones from the Ukraine War, the UK has made little progress on actually buying any. Two years ago, in an interview, the chief of the defence staff, Admiral Sir Tony Radakin, said that he wanted to see a British Army kamikaze drone unit as soon as possible – there still isn't one, although Kyiv says that drones are now the largest cause of casualties in their war. Will the defence review change UK defence decisively? The mood music has been promising. But there is one last thing to consider: Lord Robertson might be the first person in British politics to deliver two decent defence reviews, both of which get sabotaged by a lack of spending in the face of Treasury hostility. Watch this space.
