The UK strategic defence review has been billed as a 10-year stock take of the country’s military and strategic priorities and will be eagerly read by contractors for hints about the government’s spending plans.
This review, called by Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer when he came to office last July, was undertaken in the shadow of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Published on Monday, it emphasised a shift towards “warfighting readiness”, responding to heightened threats from “peer” adversaries such as Russia and China.
Who was the main winner from the review?
While areas such as cyber conflict and the Royal Air Force secured planned investment, the Royal Navy stands out as the primary winner.
The service will expand its fleet of nuclear-powered attack submarines from seven to 12, with up to 12 new attack boats developed by the UK’s Aukus partnership with the US and Australia by the late 2030s.
This alone accounts for nearly half the projected spending on the weapons systems outlined in the strategic defence review.
However, the navy’s focus will shift from that of an expeditionary force — one boasting two aircraft carriers and designed to fight distant wars against low-tech adversaries — to a service more concentrated on home defence.
Much like during the cold war, the navy’s focus will be defending the north Atlantic from encroachment by Russian submarines under a plan known as the “Atlantic Bastion”.
What is the plan for the army?
The army’s target size will remain the same — at 73,000 regular soldiers, according to the review. The current figure is about 71,000, and the review recommended a slight increase in personnel “if funding allows”.
Instead of a dramatic increase in troop numbers, the review recommended using technology, drones and software to “increase lethality 10-fold”.
The UK must be “a leading tech-enabled defence power, with an ‘integrated force’ that deters and fights and wins through constant innovation at wartime pace”, the report said.
To do this, the Ministry of Defence plans to deliver, among other things, a £1bn “digital targeting web” — artificial intelligence-driven software that is meant to hoover up battlefield data and use it to enable better and faster decision making.
Were things missing from the report?
Donald Trump was not mentioned by name in the review document — though the global unpredictability caused by his US presidency was tackled diplomatically.
“States are seeking to reshape the rules based on the international order that has governed international relations since the second world war,” the report said. “The clear shift in US strategic priorities underlines how urgent and different managing strategic competition now is.”
The Sunday Times reported that Britain wants to purchase fighter jets able to fire tactical nuclear weapons, but this was not mentioned in the review.
One person close to defence secretary John Healey said preliminary talks with the US were under way regarding the UK potentially adding air-launched tactical nuclear weapons to its capabilities, in what would be a significant shift from its current sole focus on submarine-based missiles.
The review also recommended “commencing discussions with the US and Nato on the potential benefits and feasibility of enhanced UK participation in Nato’s nuclear mission”.
What is in it for industry?
The review promised a new partnership with industry, including a “radical root-and-branch review” of procurement.
New investment in novel technologies and advanced manufacturing is supposed to help ensure that defence spending delivers “both for the warfighter and for the economy”.
More details will be provided in the defence industrial strategy — expected in the coming weeks — but UK defence companies are likely to be among the biggest corporate winners from the review.
Shares in contractors involved in building and maintaining Britain’s submarine fleet rose on Monday after the government unveiled the plan to expand it and shore up the UK nuclear deterrent.
BAE Systems, which builds submarines for the Royal Navy, including the Astute class of nuclear-powered attack boats, has already been investing heavily in expanding its Barrow-in-Furness shipyard in north-west England.
The FTSE 100 group, which produces about 80 per cent of the munitions for Britain’s armed forces, should also benefit from a pledge to build six new munition factories around the UK.
Other companies involved in the submarine supply chain, including Rolls-Royce and Babcock International, are also in line for more work.
Rolls-Royce builds the nuclear reactors that power British submarines, while Babcock maintains and services all of the UK’s boats.
Lockheed Martin of the US, which manufactures the F-35 fighter jet, could also benefit if the UK follows through on buying more of the aircraft.
A pledge to invest more in long-range weapons should benefit missile manufacturer MBDA, which is owned by BAE, Leonardo and Airbus.
Defence technology players such as Europe’s Helsing and America’s Anduril will also hope to secure work on new programmes focused on autonomous systems, including drones.
Has defence policy been set for the long term?
While supposedly a 10-year review, the fate of similar exercises in the past suggests the report’s shelf life might be more limited.
The last review was published in 2021, just four years ago, and recommended “a strategic pivot towards the Indo-Pacific region to counter China’s influence and deepen ties with allies like Australia, India, and Japan”, in line with the prevailing strategic priorities of the time.
The latest review, undertaken amid the Ukraine war, has de-emphasised global reach of this type.
While calling China a “persistent challenge”, instead the main country focus is Russia, which is a “pressing and immediate threat”. Meanwhile, the geographic focus is the north Atlantic, not the Pacific.
“We have previously seen defence reviews lionise UK industry but then fail to take the next step and invest,” said Clive Higgins, chief executive of Leonardo in the UK.
“The defence investment plan must be adequately funded in order to deliver the ‘innovation at a wartime pace’ required by the strategy. We must see more nimble and partnership-based procurement, harnessing the UK’s market power for the good of our own onshore industry.”