The Prime Minister has informed the House of Commons defence spending will rise to 2.5% of GDP by 2027, amounting to an annual increase of £13.4billion. He also stated that this increase would be funded by substantial cuts to the international aid budget – much to the chagrin of many of his backbenchers who have deep ties to the aid sector.
Almost immediately after his announcement, Foreign Secretary David Lammy sprang into action, doing the rounds apologising for cuts to foreign aid – no doubt in a bid to appease the left-wing luvvies adrift from the reality of Britain’s abysmal defence capabilities.
It’s worth asking how many of the countries we currently send aid to would do the same for Britain if it meant spending less on their own national security? I would wager the answer, which will surprise no one, is zero.
It’s only British politicians who are happy to perform harakiri in order to boast in polite society of how ‘generous’ we are. But as the saying goes, charity begins at home.
Sir Keir, who will today be making his first White House visit since President Trump’s return, hopes that this increase will be seen as an olive branch. After all, even the three wise men went with gifts. But Trump is no fool. And he will no doubt be asking what this measly increase means for Britain’s defence capabilities in practice.
Will Britain actually be able to pull its weight as a Nato ally? And, more importantly, will these uninspiring figures be enough to convince the Donald to play nice with us? Reader, I doubt it.
A 0.2% increase in GDP spending is simply not enough. If things are as bad as the PM says they are (and in all honesty there’s a chance they’re worse than we are being told), then this is merely tinkering at the edges.
How can a significant threat like Putin’s Russia, which, according to the Government, is responsible for high energy prices and many of the country’s problems, be held back with such small levels of investment?
The Government should not be waiting for a US president to dictate what constitutes adequate military funding. It is embarrassing it took an explicit threat to continental Europe for British politicians to finally acknowledge the state of our armed forces.
The decline has been evident for decades. Defence spending fell from approximately 4% of GDP in 1990 to 2.5% by the late 1990s, reaching an all-time low of around 2% by 2015. Yes, there was a Cold War dividend when the Berlin Wall fell, but politicians have been coasting for decades. And still signing us up for costly (and largely pointless) military engagements in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Instead of prioritizing national security, successive governments have neglected military readiness, leaving significant capability gaps in advanced technologies, cyber defence, and missile defence systems. Taxpayer money has instead been wasted on obsessions like net-zero targets, mass migration, and speech restrictions. Even today, with all that is happening in Ukraine, Westminster remains more concerned with policing the words of British citizens than dealing with domestic and foreign threats.
Last week, two officers from Greater Manchester police paid a visit to a grandmother – simply for criticising Labour politicians on Facebook. Yet by the end of this year, the army is expected to have fewer than 70,000 trained soldiers – not enough to fill Wembley Stadium for a hearts and minds concert.
Our military has been hollowed out for decades, and the chickens are now coming home to roost. While Keir Starmer is busy chasing his tail and committing our emaciated forces to peacekeeping missions in Ukraine, the world is waking up. The ‘rules-based order’ his lawyer friends have been busy mourning is fast disintegrating.
As things stand, ‘Pax Americana’ is toast. The era of Britain and Europe pilfering billions on welfare while expecting the US to foot the bill for our defence is over. The solutions to our predicament are obvious to everyone but Westminster.
Britain has no industrial capacity to speak of – thanks in part to the hollowing of our industries to accommodate net zero. That needs to stop. In the short term, we’ll need to buy cheap energy from the Americans and invest in fracking and other long-term energy sources at home. Our asylum system, too, should be scrapped entirely and the money redirected to protect British interests at home. The same goes for the ludicrous Chagos deal and all the other nonsense on which we squander public money.
The country is at a crossroads. We can either choose to get serious about our security, energy independence and other national priorities. Or we can continue to pine after a global order that won’t hesitate to leave us in the dust and make Britain more vulnerable than ever.
