Since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022, the UK has played a leading role in the international effort to support Ukraine’s defence. Countering Russia's threat to European security has become an acute priority for the UK’s national security strategy. The invasion has provoked questions about how prepared the UK is for contemporary warfare and whether it could improve its cooperation with European allies to enhance collective defence.
How should the UK deal with the threat from Russia?
Dr Natasha Kuhrt: "The UK Integrated Review (2021), published before Russia’s all-out invasion of Ukraine in 2022, described Russia as the most acute threat to global security. However, the UK House of Commons Defence Committee has made clear that the UK is woefully underprepared for a major conventional war both in terms of stockpiles and manpower. Suggestions to reinstate national service will not substitute for a recruitment plan, one which addresses the underlying reasons for the shortfall.
“All three main parties have pledged to increase defence spending to 2.5% of GDP, 0.5% above current levels. Former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss had proposed raising it to 3%, but Rishi Sunak has proved reluctant to implement this. The war has highlighted deficiencies in defence spending across Europe and highlighted the disparity amongst European countries in willingness to increase it; the UK lags behind Poland which now spends more (3.9% of GDP) than any other NATO country. Labour promises a Strategic Defence Review – this should consider increasing spending in the longer term.
“NATO has been criticised as being overly focused on hybrid threats to the detriment of preparing for conventional war. The danger now is to lose sight of the threat from continued Russian information operations, for example those that seek to weaken support for Ukraine and/or promote a narrative that Putin is ready for negotiations. Russia remains able to cultivate UK public and political figures who, while outside major party politics, can change the narrative around security priorities. All parties need to stay firm on the impossibility of negotiations with Putin while Russia continues to occupy Ukrainian territory.
“The UK has been leading on efforts to assist Ukraine. It is important that Russian aggression is not seen to be rewarded by yielding territory, because that harms European security, to which UK security is inextricably linked. European, and thus UK security depend on Ukraine continuing to exist.
“Presidential elections in the US create additional uncertainty. As UK security is still focused on a desire to work with the US, the UK should leverage its traditionally good relationship with the US and Europe to help maintain commitment to NATO membership for Ukraine.”
Dr Natasha Kuhrt, Senior Lecturer in International Peace and Security in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London.
Can the UK and the European Union work better on defence issues?
Gesine Weber: "The elections in the UK certainly open a window of opportunity to enhance cooperation with the EU in the field of security and defence. Since the beginning of Russia’s war against Ukraine, the UK has played a critical leadership role in Europe — ranging from its early support and training for the Ukrainian military to the delivery of sophisticated capabilities, and most importantly taking resolute action when other key EU states were still hesitant.
"Nevertheless, progress on UK-EU relations in the field of security and defence remains limited. The UK joined the EU’s Military Mobility Programme under the EU’s Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO), but until today, an agreement on deepening UK-EU security relations is missing. At the same time, European defence within the EU structures has advanced significantly through initiatives like the Act for Support of Ammunition Production (ASAP), a regulation adopted to boost the production capabilities of the EU defence industry with a view to supporting Ukraine in the war against Russia, and the Defence Industrial Strategy, which aims to enhance the EU’s long-term ability to deal effectively with threats.
"To better work with the EU, London must recognise the EU itself, not at least because of its internal market and its budget, as a player in security and defence — particularly with the uncertain trajectory of NATO in light of the US elections. Concrete steps to enhance cooperation are needed to enable the UK to join EU efforts on tackling hybrid threats, support rapid intervention and bolster maritime security. On the defence industrial side, future steps could include British participation in the European Defence Fund (EDF) or improving mutual market access.
"Cooperation with European states in bilateral and minilateral formats can complement these efforts, for example in more remote theatres like the Indo-Pacific, or on critical issues like nuclear defence. However, in the long-term, a security agreement with the EU would be critical to structure this cooperation."
Gesine Weber is a PhD candidate in the Defence Studies Department at King’s College London. Gesine’s research interests include the European security and defence policy, EU-UK cooperation, and the EU’s role as a geopolitical actor. In her role as a Research Fellow at the Paris Office of the German Marshall Fund of the US, Gesine works on the security and defence policies of the E3 (France, Germany, UK) and the role of the EU is US-China competition.
What are the military lessons for the UK from the Russian war against Ukraine?
Dr Simon Anglim: “Come 5 July, when the results of UK General Election are likely to be announced, the defence policy of the incoming government must be fixed in the context of the major security issue facing the UK today, the ongoing war in Ukraine. This war sends messages which must shape that policy.
“Most obviously, contradicting former Prime Minister Boris Johnson, the days of massed tank battles on the European Continent are certainly not over. All the slick narrative control and cyber-manipulation in the world are irrelevant if your land forces cannot exert physical control over the ground you need to further your aims. Look no further than the opening days of the war: Russia had a sound (if predictable) campaign plan for seizing control of Ukraine, but operational success hinges on outfighting your opponent on the battlefield and the Ukrainians proved better at this. Ukraine’s media narrative has subsequently proven useful in securing certain things for them, but they are now under the most terrible pressure as the Russians chew their way forward methodically, using mass of people, metal and firepower to dominate the battlefield.
“No one European power can alone match Russia’s ground power, so collective security via NATO matters more now than at any time in the past thirty years. Russia can only be deterred by the threat of defeat, so the main UK defence priority should be strong British land and air forces within NATO, and doing whatever it can to keep the USA engaged, whoever wins the US presidential election in November, because an alliance can only be as committed or as credible as its strongest member. However, how can those forces be financed from 2.5% of a stagnant GDP while continuing to subsidise Ukraine’s war effort, as both major party leaders promise? Hard choices loom ahead…”
Dr Simon Anglim is a Teaching Fellow in the Department of War Studies at King’s College London and at the UK Defence Academy. He researches currently on 21st-century land warfare and the modern British Army.