Sir Keir Starmer has been accused of “playing with fire” after putting off a decision on increasing Britain’s defence spending until after a major review of the country’s armed forces.
The prime minister will arrive in Washington for a Nato summit facing pressure to set out a timeline for raising defence spending from 2.3 per cent to 2.5 per cent of GDP.
However, Starmer insisted on Tuesday that while he was “committed” to increasing spending, no decision on a timescale would be made until after the government had carried out a strategic defence review that could take months.
“That strategic review needs to come first,” he said.
Advertisement
The move has been met with dismay by former senior military leaders, who warned that a decision could not wait given the gravity of the threats facing the UK.
Philip Ingram, a former colonel in British military intelligence, said the government was “playing with fire” because the “threat is now and it will take years to fix the army, our ammunition stocks, get the RAF and navy ready”.
Admiral Lord West, a former head of the navy who was a security minister under a previous Labour government, said Labour should outline a timeline during the summit to “set an example to all European countries” and to answer American concerns about the fact European countries do not spend enough on defence.
He said that instead the new government was “delaying spending money” by not setting out a plan, which meant “there is no money” for the Ministry of Defence.
“There is no doubt we have got hollowed out forces. There are severe doubts on whether the armed forces are capable of doing what is expected of them by the nation and we need to spend some money urgently,” he said.
Advertisement
The review will be launched by John Healey, the defence secretary, next week and Starmer said it would “secure Britain’s defences for the future”. He also made an “ironclad” guarantee that the 2.5 per cent goal would still be reached.
“There is no more important duty for me as prime minister than keeping the people of our country safe,” he added. “At a time when we face multiple threats at home and abroad, we must make sure we are ready to defend ourselves.”
The prime minister said Britain’s message to adversaries trying to undermine peace and democracy was “you will not succeed”. Starmer will hold talks with President Biden on Wednesday and others in his first foreign trip since becoming prime minister.
Leaders are expected to announce more support for Ukraine, with talks on a new Nato initiative to take over much of the work of a US-led group that has been co-ordinating aid. The push is seen as a bid to “Trump-proof” aid for Kyiv, in the event the Republican former president wins the White House again in November.
Downing Street said Starmer would focus on building constructive and useful relationships with other leaders, at a “turning point for our collective security”.
Advertisement
It is understood officials inside the MoD have already been working on the strategic defence review in anticipation of Healey’s arrival in the department. Labour insiders could not confirm whether it would be concluded by Christmas, although they said it was possible that a timeline for achieving 2.5 per cent could be laid out during the process.
One Whitehall source described the move to put off the announcement as “amateur hour”, and claimed that a review would allow senior armed forces figures to push for more money than allocated by the previous Conservative government. “They don’t need to do a review,” the source added.
James Cartlidge, the new shadow defence secretary and former minister in the MoD, wrote a letter to Healey on Tuesday to express his concern that the government had not set out a way to fund an increase in defence spending at a time “where the world is at its most dangerous for a generation”.
He wrote: “Making such a clear commitment is vital for our national security. Our armed forces need the certainty and clarity on their funding in order to plan and prepare for the future.”
Cartlidge said that at the Nato summit allies would be looking to the UK for “certainty and leadership — which can only be provided if our nation is transparent about its defence spending plans”.
Advertisement
A Labour source said: “The Conservatives underfunded and hollowed out our armed forces for 14 years. We’ve entered government with a cast iron commitment to reach 2.5 per cent as soon as possible and we will set out a clear path for it in a responsible way.”
Government insiders also denied there had been any delay to plans for defence spending, and left open the possibility that the 2.5 per cent target could be hit before 2030.
Without any new money for the MoD there are concerns that plans for new ships and fighter jets could have to be cancelled because of huge projected overspends in the RAF and Royal Navy.
Earlier this year the Conservatives had set out a timeline for increasing defence spending every year up until 2030, when it planned to reach 2.5 per cent.
Ben Wallace, the former defence secretary, said that for the defence review to be “meaningful” and for the government to reach 2.5 per cent, it must report before a comprehensive spending review.
Advertisement
“If it doesn’t then it will be seen as a Treasury-led delaying tactic and not a process that will put the security of the country at its heart,” he said.
Rachel Reeves, the chancellor, will need to draw up a comprehensive spending review to allocate money to Whitehall’s departments from April 2025. There are fears that it could be published before Healey’s review of defence needs, meaning the size of the MoD’s budget would already have been set.
Labour insiders have raised the possibility of a one-year spending review, to allow them to give Whitehall immediate clarity over their budgets and more time to set multi-year ones from 2026 onwards. However, no final decision has been taken.
A number of former military chiefs have expressed their concern about the state of Britain’s armed forces in recent weeks, with General Sir Nick Carter, the former chief of the defence staff, warning on Tuesday that Britain was not ready to fight a war. In an interview with Times Radio, he said the UK needed to bolster its armed forces if it wanted to deter President Putin of Russia from invading Nato territory in the future.
Speaking at the Future of Britain Conference later in the day, Carter said defence spending might have to almost double to 4 per cent of GDP, depending on the need, adding that the British army was too small and soldiers were underpaid.
He also warned that the Russian leader knew that the Nato alliance was “hollow”, adding: “We don’t have the defence sector we used to have. We don’t have the resilience we used to have. We are all hollow and Mr Putin knows that we are hollow and unless we do something about it we will not be able to re-impose a sense of deterrence.”
Carter said Donald Trump was right to hammer Nato allies for not spending enough on defence when he was US president. But he warned that Trump would treat the alliance like his Mar-a-Lago beach club if he wins November’s election.
“If you pay the subscription you can join it and stay in it,” Carter said. “And I think that’s worrying.”
In an interview with The Times on Monday, General Sir Patrick Sanders, a former head of the army, warned that Britain’s armed forces were so worn down that they were able to fight only a small war for no longer than a month.
He said the world was facing “as dangerous a moment as any time that we have had since 1945”, adding: “What we’re being asked to do by the government is well beyond what we are funded or capable of doing.”
Meanwhile, Starmer has blocked plans by Rishi Sunak, the former prime minister, to appoint Sir Tim Barrow as US ambassador. Barrow, the outgoing national security adviser, was lined up to replace Karen Pierce shortly before the election. However, the move was subsequently put on hold by officials after Sunak called an early election amid concerns that a political appointment should be determined by the next government.
Starmer will look to make his own appointment. Despite claims that the Labour figures Lord Mandelson or David Miliband could be lined up for the role, The Times understands that Downing Street is likely to wait for the outcome of the US presidential election in November before making a decision.
