‘Confusion reigns’ despite Sunak’s shift in tone on defence spending
A pledge by the prime minister to put the UK’s arms industry on a “war footing” and boost defence spending to 2.5% of national income by 2030 will ring as hollow as Rishi Sunak’s armed forces unless he wins the election.
It raises the question why he did not make the move sooner and aim higher – given the scale of the threat, with Russia waging a full-scale war in Ukraine, the potential for escalating conflict in the Middle East and an increasingly aggressive China.
A return to 2.5% of GDP spent on defence – while welcome – would simply bring the UK back up to the level it was achieving at the end of the last Labour government and is less than half the proportion that was dedicated to the armed forces at the height of the Cold War.
And this is a promise to act, not a game-changing moment that the Army, Royal Navy, and Royal Air Force – struggling to retain personnel, short of weapons and low on morale – will feel anytime soon.
In fact, the only genuinely new money that will be appearing this side of polling day is an additional £500m – hugely needed and gratefully received – for the Ukrainian military as it combats Russia’s full-scale invasion.
Yet what was described as a “landmark” announcement is a clear toughening of Mr Sunak’s previous, vague commitment only to boost the defence budget to the 2.5% mark from just over 2% when economic conditions allow.
It means an extra £75bn – a meaningful sum – for the UK armed forces over the next six years – if the Conservatives stay in power.
The strong language the prime minister chose to use – quoting Winston Churchill and warning that the world was more dangerous than at any time since the Cold War – also marked a significant shift in tone, delivered as he stood with the head of NATO in Poland.
Analysis:
Rishi Sunak’s defence pledge sets trap for Sir Keir Starmer
The UK move could even help to galvanise fellow NATO member states to back lifting a baseline goal for defence spending across the alliance to 2.5% of national income from 2% – even though that level is still not being met by a number of member states – at a major summit in Washington in July.
James Heappey, the former armed forces minister, applauded the prime minister’s announcement, even though he would have liked the rise to happen faster.
He wrote on X: “Huge announcement. Of course there’s an argument for more or sooner but that would be churlish response to biggest uplift in my lifetime.”
Mr Heappey said the additional investment would “transform” the Ministry of Defence’s finances, allow the defence industry to scale up production lines for munitions “and make our frontline forces more lethal and sustainable”.
Others were less supportive, noting that a hike to 2.5% is far less ambitious than the 3% or higher that a lot of military insiders, defence experts and even Conservative MPs had been calling for given what Defence Secretary Grant Shapps, has called a “pre-war world”.
“I think confusion reigns,” one defence source said on condition of anonymity. “What exactly is defence getting and when?”
The answer, unfortunately for military chiefs – who need certainty to be able to commit to new equipment programmes – will only come after the election.
That said, the new Tory pledge will raise pressure on Keir Starmer to follow suit.
Follow Sky News on WhatsApp
Keep up with all the latest news from the UK and around the world by following Sky News
Tap here
It was only last week that the Labour leader committed to increasing defence spending to 2.5% of GDP should his party take power – but he imposed a similar caveat to the one Mr Sunak has now abandoned, saying this extra expenditure would only be possible if it is achievable within the party’s rules on borrowing.
Away from political grandstanding, one thing is clear: whoever wins the next election will take charge at a time of huge risk, when the ability to deter threats will be vital.
It makes the Churchill quote – from 1934 – that Mr Sunak chose to repeat on Tuesday all the more prescient. “To urge the preparation of defence is not to assert the imminence of war. On the contrary, if war were imminent preparations for defence would be too late.”