Time to mend our broken defences

Member ratings
  • Well argued: 75%
  • Interesting points: 85%
  • Agree with arguments: 64%
14 ratings - view all
Time to mend our broken defences

This is a once-in-a-century moment for defence. It provides the crisis opportunity to fix the broken British defence process and make it fit for purpose: to start to be able to think and react at 21st century tempo and keep Britain safe.

Right now we are not safe. Lord Robertson, former defence secretary and NATO Secretary General, has explicitly said that “our national security is in peril…we are under-insured, under-prepared, and under daily (sub threshold) attack”.

The then Defence Secretary John Healey said in October 2024: “What we have not been ready to do is to fight. Unless we are ready to fight, we are not in shape to deter.”

Now the Defence Secretary has resigned and lambasted the Prime Minister for failing to do what is necessary to fix this problem. This crisis will further alarm an increasingly concerned population, worry allies who were already questioning our NATO effort, and exasperate the defence and security communities and industries who are at the end of their tether.

It is blindingly obvious that in this century defence is not safe in the hands of the single party government of the day. 21st century threats and decision making cannot be mastered on the basis of ancient political traditions, bureaucratic processes and the Treasury. The system has failed us massively over the last 30 years by hollowing out our capabilities, fighting power, and morale.

Cut through the noise, and it is clear that Labour does not care about defence and the Conservatives did not care about it when they were in charge. This is why these are “perilous days”. It is many years since the gap between our safety and the threats posed was as great as it is today.

Defence should not be held hostage to public opinion polls. The public will always tend to complacency around security until it is too late, and the Government must not treat public indifference to defence as an electoral issue. Defence never should be competing with populist policies and easy wins such as welfare payments.

We must immediately reassure the nation and our defence personnel that the rot stops right now. We must demonstrate to allies and foes that our national defence decision-making chain of command will be completely repurposed.

Ignore the media frenzy of this week’s resignation and Labour Party manoeuvres. Focus on the enormity of the defence and security challenges and the accelerating pace of technological changes which are upending everything, defence and warfare most of all.

The way to immediately calm things down and provide the reassurance required is to establish a totally new non-partisan Defence, Security and Resilience Council that holds the confidence of the nation, including defence and security personnel. It would become the most senior body, reporting directly to the Prime Minister and the Cabinet. Senior to every other part of government, because in the 21st century the first duty of government — to keep the nation safe — demands just this.

Sir Keir Starmer, supported by Kemi Badenoch, should — within days — announce that the former PMs Gordon Brown and Rishi Sunak will be appointed as interim Co-Chairs, and asked to appoint interim council members with a first meeting within one week, and draft terms of reference produced by the end of the month.

Single party government of defence and anachronistic defence procurement processes have been the greatest obstacle to British security these last twenty years. We should use this latest defence crisis — a humiliating episode in the global spotlight — to start to get our 21st-century defence in order, fast.

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout these hard economic times. So please, make a donation.


Member ratings
  • Well argued: 75%
  • Interesting points: 85%
  • Agree with arguments: 64%
14 ratings - view all

You may also like